程序公正及其心理机制

程序公正是组织公正的重要成分。自从Thibaut和Walker（1975）提出程序公正的概念以后,程序公正被引入了很多领域的研究,得到了极大的发展,但是程序公正的内容需要整合统一。发言权效应和尊重效应讨论了影响程序公正判断的因素,个人利益模型和团体价值模型则分析了其内在的心理机制。程序公正影响了大量与工作有关的态度和行为,并与分配结果产生了交互作用,其内在机制也在文章中得到了讨论。     

社会公正对权威合法性的影响:社会阶层的调节作用

社会层面中的权威合法性研究是国内外学者和管理实践者近来关注的重要问题。而社会公正的两个维度——分配公正和程序公正对权威合法性的交互作用的结果并不一致。本研究基于解释水平理论,提出社会阶层能调节分配公正和程序公正对权威合法性感知的交互作用,并通过实验室研究和情境启动两种方法进行验证。结果发现对低阶层者来说,无论是否程序公正,分配公正能显著提高个体的权威合法性感知;在分配公正和多得不公条件下,程序公正显著降低权威合法性感知。对高阶层者来说,分配公正能显著提高程序公正时的权威合法性感知;程序公正能显著提高分配公正时的权威合法性感知。研究结果启示社会管理者在推行依法治国时应针对不同阶层民众的思维方式采取管理策略。     

程序公正的测量及研究操纵

程序公正是指处理管理事务所依据的原则是否公正。普遍认可的程序公正原则包括一致性、避免偏见、准确性、可修正、代表性、道德与伦理原则。程序公正研究主要有测量和实验操纵两种研究范式。对程序公正的测量主要以单维为主,亦有少数多维测量量表;对程序公正的实验操纵主要以发言权为主,有少数研究对准确性、无偏性或综合几项原则进行操纵。未来研究应考虑程序公正的结构问题,对程序公正的操纵范围进行扩展、操纵方法考虑情景性,还需关注程序公正与程序不公正的差异。     

程序公正、不确定性对公共政策可接受性的影响:情感信任、认知信任的中介作用

为了研究程序公正、不确定性与公共政策可接受性之间的关系,并进一步考察情感信任和认知信任在其中的中介效应,本研究选取公共政策领域,通过问卷调查的方法随机选取510名北京市民进行研究。研究发现,程序公正与公共政策可接受性正相关,不确定性与公共政策可接受性负相关,情感信任中介程序公正与公共政策可接受性,并对不确定性与公共政策可接受性之间有遮掩效应,而认知信任不存在显著的中介作用。     

组织公正感研究进展

章先介绍了公正及公正感的概念,进而分析了组织公正感的概念。国外组织公正感的研究可分成3个阶段,首先由Adams提出分配公平,之后Thibaut、Leventhal等提出程序公正,最后Bies等提出相互作用公正。尽管国外对组织公正感研究比较广泛,但对公正感的结构及测量方法还存在分歧,有单因素理论、双因素理论、三因素理论和四因素理论。     

领导者行为一致性研究:过去、现在与未来

领导者行为一致性是指员工关于领导者言行匹配程度的知觉模式。行为一致性是一个本身不存在善恶之说但对于达到道德上的善却非常必要的附属性美德。领导者行为一致性的测量方法包括情景测量法和量表测量法。在实证研究模型中,领导者行为一致性通常扮演因变量、自变量、中介变量和调节变量等角色。未来研究应该关注领导者行为一致性的多元测量方法,情景变量的调节效应,领导者行为不一致性,以及行为一致性概念在集体层次或员工层次上的应用等方面。     

论社会公正与自由的关系

自由的本义是不受限制和阻碍 ,政治哲学中的自由概念具有明确的含义 ,它并不离开常识很远 ,主要指社会制度所加于个人的限制的范围应尽可能小 ,并且以合理性为条件并向选择性开放。罗尔斯等政治哲学家对自由都作过详细的论述 ,包括自由与平等、自由与法律的关系 ,以及只能以更大的自由为理由来限制当下的自由。一方面 ,服从良法可以捍卫公民的自由 ,但另一方面 ,正如洛克所说 ,法律的目的不是否弃或限制自由 ,而是保护并扩大自由。法律与自由在此原则基础上一致了起来 ,不应片面地只强调一个方面。自由与社会整合关系密切 ,不尊重公民个人自由选择权的整合是表面的、难以持久的 ,真正的社会团结是以负责任的个人的充分自由选择为基础的。中国改革开放的实践是扩大公民自由选择权、加强社会整合的一个实例。自由与公正关系密切 ,公正分为实质公正和程序公正 ,实质公正强调的是分配结果的平等 ,而程序公正则要求分配标准的普适性 ,同等情况同等对待。程序公正看起来比实质公正具有更大的可行性 ,强调的是竞争起点的平等。就可行性而言 ,以程序公正为主、实质公正为辅 ,看起来是更现实合理的分配方式。     

情景判断测验的开发程序、构思效度及研究趋势

章详细介绍情景判断测验开发的一般程序,对情景判断测验的多种形式和记分方法进行了总结和比较。同时,从情景判断测验的结果与认知能力、个性和工作经验等关系的角度出发,分析了情景判断测验的构思效度,认为情景判断测验测量的是多维构思。文章最后认为,需要从与其他构思的关系、测评指定构思、影响效度的因素以及跨文化比较等四个方面对情景判断测验开展进一步研究。     

家长式领导与组织公正感的关系

以428名企事业单位员工为调查对象,采用问卷法,探讨了家长式领导与组织公正感的关系,结果表明：（1）仁慈领导对组织公正感各维度有显著的积极影响;德行领导对组织公正感各维度有显著的积极影响;权威领导对领导公正有显著的消极影响;（2）在分配公正、程序公正上,德行与权威领导有显著负交互效应;在领导公正、领导解释上,仁慈与权威领导有显著负交互效应。最后,对研究的理论和实践意义作了探讨,并提出了未来的研究方向     

分配不公正下的退缩行为：程序公正和互动公正的影响

以160名中学教师为被试,采用2×2的完全随机设计,以模拟故事（scenarios）的方法呈现刺激,研究了在职称评定中分配不公正的前提下,程序公正/不公正,互动公正/不公正对教师的退缩行为（消极怠工、拒绝帮助、离职、对校长的消极态度）的影响。结果表明,在分配不公正条件下：（1）程序公正、互动公正均影响教师的消极怠工程度;（2）程序公正、互动公正均影响教师的拒绝帮助行为程度,而且交互作用显著;（3）互动公正影响教师对上司的消极态度,程序公正无显著影响;（4）程序公正和互动公正对离职意愿影响均不显著     

What determines people’s fairness judgments? Identification and outcomes influence procedural justice evaluations under uncertainty

When the procedures people experience are uncertain, factors unrelated to principles of procedural justice may nevertheless shape procedural justice judgments. This paper investigates two of these factors: an individual’s level of social identification with the group enacting the procedures and the outcomes associated with the procedure. It was predicted and found that high (vs. low) levels of identification promote relatively positive perceptions of procedural justice. It was also predicted and found that desirable (vs. undesirable) outcomes promote relatively positive perceptions of procedural justice. These effects only emerged in the absence of direct information indicating whether procedures were (un)fair. By showing an influence of identification and outcomes on procedural justice judgments under conditions of informational uncertainty, these studies provide important experimental evidence that integrates and extends previous research on justice, identity, and uncertainty to understand subjective evaluations of process fairness.     

Contextual and Cognitive Determinants of Procedural Justice Perceptions in Promotion Barriers for Women

The relationships between procedural justice in promotion decisions for women and contextual factors deemed as contributing to glass ceilings were examined. The contextual factors examined were a lack of female role models, limited networking opportunities for women, gender segregation, and formal career ladders. It was found that gender schema is a moderator between procedural justice and the perceived number of female role models and between procedural justice and the perception of formal career ladders. Although gender schema was not a moderator in the relationship between procedural justice and gender segregation, nor in the relationship between procedural justice and networking opportunities for women, a significant main effect was found. These results are consistent with the notion that organizational justice perceptions are products of individual cognitive processes, which develop in response to cultural expectations.     

The role of standing in the psychology of procedural justice: Towards theoretical integration

In the current chapter, the authors explore the relation between social standing and procedural justice. Standing is an important construct in procedural justice theories and tends to be broadly defined as the position that people have in social groups. It is argued that the standing construct suffers from conceptual ambiguity: In procedural justice literature two distinct interpretations of standing can be distinguished, one defining standing as intragroup status and one defining standing as the extent to which people are included in social groups. Furthermore, it is argued that research findings on the relation between standing and procedural justice are not conclusive. The authors review recent empirical findings that address these concerns, and conceptually integrate these findings. In closing, the authors outline avenues for future research that the procedural justice field may want to take, and discuss implications of the work reviewed here.     

Self‐Esteem and Justice Orientation as Moderators for the Effects of Individual‐Targeted and Group‐Targeted Justice

Drawing on the self‐interest and moral virtues perspectives of justice, we examine how self‐esteem and justice orientation as individual difference factors moderate the effects of individual‐targeted and group‐targeted justice on helping behaviors and intention to leave. A scenario‐based study was conducted using a total sample of 624 Japanese undergraduate students. The results highlighted the difference between the moderating roles of self‐esteem and justice orientation. Self‐esteem moderated the effect of individual‐targeted procedural justice on intention to leave such that the effect was stronger when self‐esteem was high. In contrast, justice orientation mainly moderated the effects of group‐targeted procedural and distributive justice on helping behaviors such that the effects were weaker when justice orientation was high. Implications of our findings and future research directions are discussed.     

Procedural justice climate and group power distance: an examination of cross-level interaction effects

In this article, the authors extend research on the cross-level effects of procedural justice climate by theorizing and testing its interaction with group power distance. The results indicated that group power distance moderated the relationships between procedural justice climate and individual-level outcomes (organizational commitment and organization-directed citizenship behavior). More specifically, a larger group power distance was found to attenuate the positive cross-level effects of procedural justice climate. Implications for procedural justice climate research are discussed.     

Procedural justice and intragroup status: Knowing where we stand in a group enhances reactions to procedures

The current research investigates the role of relative intragroup status as a moderator of people’s reactions to procedural justice. Based on a review of the procedural justice literature, the authors argue that information about intragroup status influences people’s reactions to variations in procedural justice. In correspondence with predictions, two experiments show that reactions of people who have been informed about their intragroup status position (either low, average, or high) are influenced more strongly by voice as opposed to no-voice procedures than people who are not informed about their intragroup status. It is concluded that knowing where we stand in a group enhances reactions to procedural justice.     

FACTORS AFFECTING COWORKERS' PROCEDURAL JUSTICE INFERENCES OF THE WORKPLACE ACCOMMODATIONS OF EMPLOYEES WITH DISABILITIES

We examine coworkers' procedural justice inferences about the accommodation of another employee when they believe it is for disability-related reasons. Legal constraints that prevent the release of information about the accommodation process may lead to negative inferences about fairness. However, we argue that other factors can help to make inferences about procedural justice more positive. We present a model of the process through which coworkers engage in making inferences about the procedural justice of accommodating a coworker with a disability and the individual and organizational level factors likely to influence those inferences. Consequently, we present propositions to be studied in future empirical research and suggestions to managers who desire to reduce negative coworker reactions to accommodating individuals with disabilities.     

Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions,recommendation intentions,and intentions to reapply

This study examines the Gilliland model of applicants’ reactions to selection procedures in a Web‐based context, revealing new theoretical and empirical insights. We extend existing research by further considering a reflective first‐order formative second‐order model consisting of three second‐order justice factors of formal characteristics, explanation, and interpersonal treatment modeled by 11 formative indicators representing the procedural justice rules. Partial least squares path modeling analysis revealed that formal characteristics and interpersonal treatment are positively related to perceptions of process fairness in Web‐based selection. Most salient procedural justice rules revealed were treatment of the applicants, opportunity to perform, propriety of questions, and reconsideration opportunity. Furthermore, process fairness, which was positively related to applicants’ reactions, fully mediated the relationship between justice factors and applicants’ reactions.     

The Influence of Decision Makers' Goals on Their Concerns About Procedural Justice1

Two studies examine how decision makers' goals of enhancing organizational effectiveness and promoting positive interpersonal relations shape their decision making when they are allocating scarce resources among group members. Past research has conceptualized this problem as one of balancing between the use of two distributive justice principles: equity and equality. The studies reported examine the degree to which authorities are also concerned about issues of procedural justice. The results suggest that experienced decision makers—both managerial and administrative—believe that when trying to maintain positive interpersonal relations it is as important to use decision-making procedures that will be regarded as fair (procedural justice) as it is to allocate outcomes in ways which will be regarded as fair (distributive justice). Decision makers' definitions of procedural justice are also examined.