What is organizational justice? A historical overview

Handbook of Organizational Justice

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 3-56

  Colquitt, Jason A ^a   Greenberg, Jerald ^a   Zapata Phelan, Cindy P ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85118960738     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (185)

1. Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422-436.
2. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267-299). New York: Academic Press.
3. Adams, J. S., & Freedman, S. (1976). Equity theory revisited: Comments and annotated bibliography. In L. Berkowitz & E. Walster (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 43-90). New York: Academic Press.
4. Adams, J. S., & Rosenbaum, W. B. (1962). The relationship of worker productivity to cognitive dissonance about wage inequities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 46, 161-164.
5. Alexander, S., & Ruderman, M. (1987). The role of procedural and distributive justice in organizational behavior. Social Justice Research, 1, 177-198.
6. Ambrose, M. L., Seabright, M. A., & Schminke, M. (2002). Sabotage in the workplace: The role of organizational justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 947-965.
7. Aquino, K., Griffeth, R. W., Allen, D. G., & Horn, P. W. (1997). Integrating justice constructs into the turnover process: A test of a referent cognitions model. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1208-1227.
8. Aquino, K., Lewis, M. U., & Bradfield, M. (1999). Justice constructs, negative affectivity, and employee deviance: A proposed model and empirical test. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 1073-1091.
9. Aydin, O., & Sahin, D. N. (2003). The effect of different types of reward allocation on future work partner preferences: An indirect test of the self-interest view. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 133-142.
10. Barclay, L. J. (2003, April). Foliowing in the footsteps of Mary Parker Follett: Exploring how insights from the past can advance organizational justice theory and research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.
11. Bies, R. J (1985). Individual reactions to corporate recruiting encounters: The importance of fairness. Unpublished manuscript cited in Bies and Moag (1986).
12. Bies, R. J. (1987). Beyond "voice": The influence of decision-maker justification and sincerity on procedural fairness judgments. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 17, 3-14.
13. Bies, R. J. (2001). Interactional (in)justice: The sacred and the profane. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 85-108). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
14. Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43-55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
15. Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L. (1987). Interactional fairness judgments: The influence of causal accounts. Social justice Research, 1, 199-218.
16. Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L (1988). Voice and justification: Their influence on procedural fairness judgments. Academy of Management journal, 31, 676-685.
17. Blader, S. L., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). What constitutes fairness in work settings? A four- component model of procedural justice. Human Resource Management Review, 13, 107-126.
18. Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
19. Bobocel, D. R., & Holmvall, C. M. (2001). Are interactional justice and procedural justice different? Framing the debate. In S. Gilliland, D. Steiner, & D. Skarlicki (Eds.), Theoretical and cultural perspectives on organizational justice (pp. 85-108). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
20. Brams, S. J., & Taylor, A. D. (1996). Fair division: From cake-cutting to dispute resolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. Brehm, J. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic Press.
22. Brockner, J. (2002). Making sense of procedural fairness: How high procedural fairness can reduce or heighten the influence of outcome favorability. Academy of Management Review, 27, 58-76.
23. Brockner, J., DeWitt, R. L., Grover, S., & Reed, T. (1990). When it is especially important to explain why: Factors affecting the relationship between managers' explanations of a layoff and survivors' reactions to the layoff, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 389-407.
24. Brockner, J., Konovsky, M., Cooper-Schneider, R., Folger, R. Martin, C., & Bies, R. J. (1994). Interactive effects of procedural justice and outcome negativity on victims and survivors of job loss. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 397-409.
25. Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 189-208.
26. Byrne, Z. (1999, April). How do procedural and interactional justice influence multiple levels of organizational outcomes? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Atlanta, GA.
27. Byrne, Z. S., & Cropanzano, R. (2001). History of organizational justice: The founders speak. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: From theory to practice (pp. 3-21). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28. Cohen, R. L. (1986). Justice: Views from the social sciences. New York: Plenum.
29. Cohen, R. L., & Greenberg, J. (1982). The justice concept in social psychology. In J. Greenberg & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Equity and justice in social behavior (pp. 1-41). New York: Academic Press.
30. Collie, T., Bradley, G., & Sparks, B. A. (2002). Fair process revisited: Differential effects of interactional and procedural justice in the presence of social comparison information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 545-555.
31. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386-400.
32. Colquitt, I. A., & Chertkoff, J. M. (2002). Explaining injustice: The interactive effect of explanation and outcome on fairness perceptions and task motivation, Journal of Management, 28, 591-610.
33. Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445.
34. Colquitt, J. A., & Greenberg, J. (2003). Organizational justice: A fair assessment of the state of the literature. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (2nd ed.) (pp. 165-210). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Cropanzano, R., Byrne, Z. S., Bobocel, D. R., & Rupp, D. E. (2001). Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social entities, and other denizens of organizational justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 164-209.
36. Cropanzano, R., & Folger, R. (1989). Referent cognitions and task decision autonomy: Beyond equity theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 293-299.
37. Cropanzano, R., & Randall, M. L. (1993). Injustice and work behavior: A historical review. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 3-20). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
38. Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., Mohler, C. J., & Schminke, M. (2001). Three roads to organizational justice. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management (Vol. 19, pp. 1-113). New York: Elsevier Science.
39. Crosby, F. (1976). A model of egoistical relative deprivation. Psychological Review, 83, 85-113.
40. Crosby, F. (1982). Relative deprivation and ivorking women. New York: Oxford University Press.
41. Crosby, F. (1984). Relative deprivation in organizational settings. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 6, pp. 51-93). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
42. Dailey, R. C., & Kirk, D. J. (1992). Distributive and procedural justice as antecedents of job dissatisfaction and intent to turnover. Human Relations, 45, 305-317.
43. Daniels, N., Light, D., & Caplan, R. (1996). Benchmarks of fairnessfor health care reform. New York: Oxford University Press.
44. Davis, J. A. (1959). A formal interpretation of the theory of relative deprivation. Sociometry, 22, 280-296.
45. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis for distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137-149.
46. Dollard, J., Doob, L. W., Miller, N. E., Mowrer, O. H., & Sears, R. R. (1939). Frustration and aggression. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
47. Earley, P. C., & Lind, E. A. (1987). Procedural justice and participation in task selection: The role of control in mediating justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1148-1160.
48. Elliott, G. C., & Meeker, B. F. (1986). Achieving fairness in the face of competing concerns: The different effects of individual and group characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 754-760.
49. Farkas, A. J., & Anderson, N. H. (1979). Multidimensional input in equity theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 879-896.
50. Feather, N. T. (2003). Distinguishing between deservingness and entitlement: Earned outcomes versus lawful outcomes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 367-385.
51. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
52. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
53. Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of "voice" and improvement on experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108-119.
54. Folger, R. (1986a). A referent cognitions theory of relative deprivation. In J. M. Olson, C. P. Herman, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Relative deprivation and social comparison: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 4, pp. 33-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
55. Folger, R. (1986b). Rethinking equity theory: A referent cognitions model. In H. W. Bierhoff, R. L. Cohen, & J. Greenberg (Eds.), Research in social relations (pp. 145-162). New York: Plenum Press.
56. Folger, R. (1987). Reformulating the preconditions of resentment: A referent cognitions model. In J. C. Masters & W. P. Smith (Eds.), Social comparison, justice, and relative deprivation: Theoretical, empirical, and policy perspectives (pp. 183-215). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
57. Folger, R. (1993). Reactions to mistreatment at work. In K. Murnighan (Ed.), Social psychology in organizations: Advances in theory and research (pp. 161-183). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
58. Folger, R. (1998). Fairness as a moral virtue. In M. Schminke (Ed.), Managerial ethics: Morally managing people and processes (pp. 13-34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
59. Folger, R. (2001). Fairness as deonance. In S. W. Gilliland, D. D. Steiner, & D. P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Theoretical and cultural perspectives on organizational justice (pp. 3-34). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
60. Folger, R., & Bies, R. J. (1989). Managerial responsibilities and procedural justice. Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 79-89.
61. Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
62. Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (2001). Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 89-118). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
63. Folger, R., & Greenberg, J. (1985). Procedural justice: An interpretive analysis of personnel systems. In K. Rowland & G. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 3, pp. 141-183). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
64. Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 115-130.
65. Folger, R., & Martin, C. (1986). Relative deprivation and referent cognitions: Distributive and procedural justice effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 531-546.
66. Folger, R., Rosenfield, D., Grove, J., & Corkran, L. (1979). Effects of "voice" and peer opinions on responses to inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2253-2261.
67. Folger, R., Rosenfield, D., & Robinson, T. (1983). Relative deprivation and procedural justifications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 268-273.
68. Gilliland, S. W., Groth, M., Baker, R. C. IV, Dew, A. F., Polly, L. M., & Langdon, J. C. (2001). Improving applicants' reactions to rejection letters: An application of fairness theory. Personnel Psychology, 54, 669-703.
69. Goodman, P. S., & Friedman, A. (1971). An examination of Adams' theory of inequity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 271-288.
70. Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-178.
71. Greenberg, J. (1978a). Equity, motivation, and effects of past reward on allocation decisions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 131-134.
72. Greenberg, J. (1978b). Effects of reward value and retaliative power on allocation decisions: Justice, generosity, or greed? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 367-379.
73. Greenberg, J. (1982). Approaching equity and avoiding inequity in groups and organizations. In J. Greenberg & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Equity and justice in social behavior (pp. 389-435). New York: Academic Press.
74. Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 340-342.
75. Greenberg, J. (1987a). Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions: Do the means justify the ends? Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 55-61.
76. Greenberg, J. (1987b). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Revieiu, 12, 9-22.
77. Greenberg, J. (1988). Equity and workplace status: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 606-613.
78. Greenberg, J. (1989). Cognitive re-evaluation of outcomes in response to underpayment inequity. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 174-184.
79. Greenberg, J. (1990). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of paycuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 561-568.
80. Greenberg, J. (1993a). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 79-103). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
81. Greenberg, J. (1993b). Stealing in the name of justice: Informational and interpersonal moderators of theft reactions to underpayment inequity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 81-103.
82. Greenberg, J. (1994). Using socially fair procedures to promote acceptance of a work site smoking ban. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 288-297.
83. Greenberg, J. (1996). The quest for justice on the job. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
84. Greenberg, J., & Bies, R. J. (1992). Establishing the role of empirical studies of organizational justice in philosophical inquiries into business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 433-444.
85. Greenberg, J., Bies, R. J., & Eskew, D. E. (1991). Establishing fairness in the eye of the beholder: Managing impressions of organizational justice. In R. Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Applied impression management: How image making affects managerial decisions (pp. 111-132). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
86. Greenberg, J., & Folger, R. (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Basic group processes (pp. 235-256). New York: Springer-Verlag.
87. Greenberg, J., & Leventhal, G. S. (1976). Equity and the use of overreward to motivate performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 179-190.
88. Greenberg, J., & Lind, E. A. (2000). The pursuit of organizational justice: From conceptualization to implication to application. In C. L. Cooper & E. A. Locke (Eds.), I/O psychology: What we know about theory and practice (pp. 72-105). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
89. Greenberg, J., & Ornstein, S. (1983). High status job title as compensation for underpayment: A test of equity theory, jourrnl of Applied Psychology, 68, 285-297.
90. Harder, J. W. (1991). Equity theory versus expectancy theory: The case of major league baseball free agents, Journal of Applied Psyclwlogy, 76, 458-464.
91. Harris, R. J. (1976). Handling negative inputs: On the plausible equity formulae. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 194-209.
92. Hatfield, E., Greenberger, D., Traupmann, J., & Lambert, P. (1982). Equity and sexual satisfaction in recently married couples. Journal of Sex Research, 18, 18-32.
93. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
94. Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice and loyalty: Responses to declines in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
95. Hobbes, T. (1947). Leviathan (M. Oakeshott, Ed.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell. (Original work published 1651)
96. Homans, G. C. (1953). Status among clerical workers. Human Organization, 12, 5-10.
97. Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63, 597-606.
98. Homans, G. C. (1961). Social behaviour: Its elementary forms. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
99. Homans, G. C. (1982). Foreword. In J. Greenberg & R. L. Cohen (Eds.), Equity and justice in social behavior (pp. xi-xviii). New York: Academic Press.
100. Judge, T. A., & Colquitt, J. A. (2004). Organizational justice and stress: The mediating role of work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 395-404.
101. Kanfer, R., Sawyer, J., Earley, P. C., & Lind, E. A. (1987). Participation in task evaluation procedures: The effects of influential opinion expression and knowledge of evaluative criteria on attitudes and performance. Social Justice Research, 1, 235-249.
102. Kanigel, R. (1997). The one best way: Frederick Winslow Taylor and the enigma of efficiency. New York: Viking.
103. Kernan, M. C., & Hanges, P. J. (2002). Survivor reactions to reorganization: Antecedents and consequences of procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 916-928.
104. Konovsky, M. A., & Folger, R. (1987). Relative effects of procedural and distributive justice on employee attitudes. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 17, 15-24.
105. Kuhn, T. S. (1963). The essential tension: Tradition and innovation in scientific research. In C. W. Taylor & F. Barron (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 18-30). New York: Wiley and Sons.
106. LaTour, S. (1978). Determinants of participant and observer satisfaction with adversary and inquisitorial models of adjudication. Jourml of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1531-1545.
107. Lemer, M. J. (1977). The justice motive: Some hypotheses as to its origins and forms. Journal of Personality, 45, 1-52.
108. Leventhal, G. S. (1976a). The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organizations. In L. Berkowitz & W. Walster (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 91-131). New York: Academic Press.
109. Leventhal, G. S. (1976b). Fairness in social relationships. In J. W. Thibaut, J. T. Spence, & R. C. Carson (Eds.), Contemporary topics in social psychology (pp. 211-239). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
110. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, & R. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27-55). New York: Plenum Press.
111. Leventhal, G. S., Karuza, J., & Fry, W. R. (1980). Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences. In G. Mikula (Ed.), justice and social interaction (pp. 167-218). New York: Springer-Verlag.
112. Leventhal, G. S., Michaels, J. W., & Sanford, C. (1972). Inequity and interpersonal conflict: Reward allocation and secrecy about reward as methods of preventing conflict, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 88-102.
113. Lind, E. A. (1992, April). The fairness heuristic: Rationality and "relationality" in procedural evaluations. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference of the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics, Irvine, CA.
114. Lind, E. A. (1994). Procedural justice, disputing, and reactions to legal authorities (ABF Working Paper No. 9403). Chicago: American Bar Foundation.
115. Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 56-88). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
116. Lind, E. A., Greenberg, J., Scott, K. S., & Welchans, T. D. (2000). The winding road from employee to complainant: Situational and psychological determinants of wrongful termination claims. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 557-590.
117. Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, P. C. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 952-959.
118. Lind, E. A., Kulik, C. T., Ambrose, M., & de Vera Park, M. V. (1993). Individual and corporate dispute resolution: Using procedural fairness as a decision heuristic. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 224-251.
119. Lind, E. A., Lissak, R. I., & Conlon, D. E. (1983). Decision control and process control effects on procedural fairness judgments, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13, 338-350.
120. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.
121. Lind, E. A., Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Procedural context and culture: Variation in the antecedents of procedural justice judgments, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 767-780.
122. Lind, E. A., & Van den Bos, K. (2002). When fairness works: Toward a general theory of uncertainty management. In B. M. Staw & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 24, pp. 181-223). Boston: Elsevier.
123. Locke, J. (1994). An essay concerning human understanding. New York: Prometheus. (Original work published 1669)
124. Lord, R. G., & Hohenfeld, J. A. (1979). Longitudinal field assessment of equity effects on the performance of major league baseball players, Journal of Applied Psychology 64, 19-26.
125. Mannix, E. A., Neale, M. A., & Northcraft, G. B. (1995). Equity, equality, or need? The effects of organizational culture on the allocation of benefits and burdens. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 276-286.
126. Mansour-Cole, D. M., & Scott, S. G. (1998). Hearing it through the grapevine: The influence of source, leader-relations, and legitimacy on survivors' fairness perceptions. Personnel Psychology, 51, 25-54.
127. Martin, J. (1981). Relative deprivation: A theory of distributive injustice for an era of shrinking resources. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 53-107). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
128. Marx, K. (1978). Critique of the Gotha program. In R. C. Tucker (Ed.), The Marx-Engels reader (2nd ed., pp. 42-56). New York: Norton. (Original work published 1875)
129. Masterson, S. S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B. M., & Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair procedures and treatment on work relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 738-748.
130. McFarlin, D. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (1992). Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 626-637.
131. Meindl, I. R. (1989). Managing to be fair: An exploration of values, motives, and leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 34, 252-276.
132. Merton, R., & Rossi, A. S. (1957). Contributions to the theory of reference group behavior. In R. Merton (Ed.), Social theory and social structure (pp. 3-19). New York: Free Press.
133. Mill, J. S. (1940). Utilitarianism, liberty, and responsive government. London: J. M. Dent. (Original work published 1861)
134. Miner, J. B. (2003). The rated importance, scientific validity, and practical usefulness of organizational behavior theories: A quantitative review. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2, 250-268.
135. Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 845-855.
136. Moschetti, G. J. (1979). Calculating equity: Ordinal and ratio criteria. Social Psychology Quarterly, 42, 172-176.
137. Mowday, R. T. (1979). Equity theory predictions of behavior in organizations. In R. M. Steers & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Motivation and work behavior (pp. 53-71). New York: Academic Press.
138. Mowday, R. T., & Colwell, K. A. (2003). Employee reactions to unfair outcomes in the workplace: The contributions of equity theory to understanding work motivation. In L. W. Porter, G. A. Bigley, & R. M. Steers (Eds.), Motivation and work behavior (pp. 65-113). Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
139. Niehoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 527-556.
140. Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.
141. Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 43-72). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
142. Pritchard, R. D. (1969). Equity theory: A review and critique. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 4, 176-211.
143. Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice, revised edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
144. Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
145. Reis, H. T. (1986). Levels of interest in the study of interpersonal justice. In H. W. Bierhoff, R. L. Cohen, & J. Greenberg (Eds.), Justice in social relations (pp. 187-226). New York: Plenum.
146. Romer, D. (1977). Limitations in the equity theory approach: Toward a resolution of the "negative inputs" controversy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 228-231.
147. Ross, W. D. (1925). The Oxford translation of Aristotle, Vol. IX, The Nichomachean ethics. London: Oxford Press.
148. Rupp, D. E., & Cropanzano, R. (2002). The mediating effects of social exchange relationships in predicting workplace outcomes from multifoci organizational justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 925-946.
149. Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1995). Failing at fairness: How America's schools cheat girls. New York: Scribner.
150. Samuel, W. (1978). Toward a simple but useful equity theory: A comment on the Romer article. Perscmality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 135-138.
151. Skarlicki, D. P., & Latham, G. P. (1997). Leadership training in organizational justice to increase citizenship behavior within a labor union: A replication. Personnel Psychology, 50, 617-633.
152. Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., Huo, Y. J., Ortiz, D. J., & Lind, E. A. (1998). The self-relevant implications of the group-value model: Group membership, self-worth, and treatment quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 470-493.
153. Sober, E., & Wilson, D. S. (1998). Unto others: The evolution and psychology of unselfish behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
154. Stouffer, S. A., Suchman, E. A., DeVinney, L. C., Star, S. A., & Williams, R. M., Jr. (1949). The American soldier: Adjustment during Army life, Volume I. Clinton, MA: Colonial Press.
155. Sturman, T. S., & Thibodeau, R. (2001). Performance-undermining effects of baseball free agent contracts. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 23, 23-36.
156. Sweeney, P. D., & McFarlin, D. B. (1993). Workers' evaluations of the "ends" and the "means": An examination of four models of distributive and procedural justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55, 23-40.
157. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
158. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure. California Law Review, 66, 541-566.
159. Thibaut, J., Walker, L., LaTour, S., & Houlden, P. (1974). Procedural justice as fairness. Stanford Law Review, 26, 1271-1289.
160. Thibaut, J., Walker, L., & Lind, E. A. (1972). Adversary presentation and bias in legal decision-making. Haivard Laio Review, 86, 386-401.
161. Tyler, T. R. (1987). Conditions leading to value-expressive effects in judgments of procedural justice: A test of four models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 333-344.
162. Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 830-838.
163. Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 850-863.
164. Tyler, T. R. (1997). The psychology of legitimacy: A relational perspective on voluntary deference to authorities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 323-345.
165. Tyler, T. R., & Bies, R. J. (1990). Beyond formal procedures: The interpersonal context of procedural justice. In J. Carroll (Ed.), Applied social psychology and organizational settings (pp. 77-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
166. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
167. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2002). Autonomous vs. comparative status: Must we be better than others to feel good about ourselves? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 813-838.
168. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 349-361.
169. Tyler, T. R., & Caine, A. (1981). The influence of outcomes and procedures on satisfaction with formal leaders. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 642-655.
170. Tyler, T. R., Degoey, P., & Smith, H. (1996). Understanding why the justice of group procedures matters: A test of the psychological dynamics of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 913-930.
171. Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115-191). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
172. Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K. A., & Spodick, N. (1985). Influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders: Exploring the meaning of process control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 72-81.
173. Van den Bos, K. (2001a). Fairness heuristic theory: Assessing the information to which people are reacting has a pivotal role in understanding organizational justice. In S. Gilliland, D. Steiner, & D. Skarlicki (Eds.), Theoretical and cultural perspectives on organizational justice (pp. 63-84). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
174. Van den Bos, K. (2001b). Uncertainty management: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 931-941.
175. Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 1-60). Boston: Elsevier.
176. Van den Bos, K., E. A. Lind, & Wilke, H. A. M. (2001). The psychology of procedural and distributive justice viewed from the perspective of fairness heuristic theory. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace (Vol. 2, pp. 49-66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
177. Van den Bos, K., & Miedema, J. (2000). Toward understanding why fairness matters: The influence of mortality salience of reactions to procedural fairness. Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes, 79, 355-366.
178. Van den Bos, K., & Van Prooijen, J.-W. (2001). Referent cognitions theory: The role of closeness of reference points in the psychology of voice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 616-626.
179. Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1997). Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 95-104.
180. Van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A. M., & Lind, E. A. (1998). When do we need procedural fairness? The role of trust in authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1449-1458.
181. Walker, L., LaTour, S., Lind, E. A., & Thibaut, J. (1974). Reactions of participants and observers to modes of adjudication. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 4, 295-310.
182. Walker, L., Lind, E. A., & Thibaut, J. (1979). The relation between procedural and distributive justice. Virginia Law Review, 65, 1401-1420.
183. Walster, E., Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. W. (1973). New directions in equity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 151-176.
184. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: 'Theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
185. Weick, K. E. (1966). The concept of equity in the perception of pay. Administrative Science Quarterly, 11, 414-439.