A closer look at the relationship between justice perceptions and union participation.

In this study, a series of nested models was tested to assess the extent to which the relationship between process-related justice and union participation is mediated by perceived union support and union commitment. Members of a steelworkers' local (N = 615) participated in the study. Fit indices most strongly supported a fully mediated model. Unlike previous research, process-related justice was operationalized as 2 distinct variables: procedural and interactional justice. Interactional justice was found to have a substantially stronger relationship with support perceptions than procedural justice. Results also indicated union support accounted for a greater amount of unique variance in union commitment than perceived union instrumentality. The results are discussed in relation to trust theory and the generalization of organization science across different types of organizations.     

Me or we? The role of personality and justice as other-centered antecedents to innovative citizenship behaviors within organizations

The present research takes an "other-centered" approach to examining personal and contextual antecedents of taking charge behavior in organizations. Largely consistent with the authors' hypotheses, regression analyses involving data collected from 2 diverse samples containing both coworkers and supervisors demonstrated that the other-centered trait, duty, was positively related to taking charge, whereas the self-centered trait, achievement striving, was negatively related to taking charge. In addition, the authors found that procedural justice at the organizational level was positively related to taking charge when evaluated by a coworker, while both procedural and distributive justice were positively related to taking charge when considered by a supervisor. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

The Role of Justice in Organizations: A Meta-Analysis

The correlates of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice were examined using 190 studies samples, totaling 64,757 participants. We found the distinction between the three justice types to be merited. While organizational practices and outcomes were related to the three justice types, demographic characteristics of the perceiver were, in large part, unrelated to perceived justice. Job performance and counterproductive work behaviors, considered to be outcomes of perceived justice, were mainly related to procedural justice, whereas organizational citizenship behavior was similarly predicted by distributive and procedural justice. Most satisfaction measures were similarly related to all justice types. Although organizational commitment and trust were mainly related to procedural justice, they were also substantially related to the other types of justice. Findings from laboratory and field studies are not always in agreement. Future research agendas are discussed.     

A TEST OF THE GROUP VALUES AND CONTROL MODELS OF PROCEDURAL JUSTICE FROM THE COMPETING PERSPECTIVES OF LABOR AND MANAGEMENT

A path model was developed to determine the predictive power of the group values (Lind & Tyler, 1988) and the self-interest/control (Thibaut & Walker, 1975) models in the justice judgments of three state impasse resolution procedures for teacher bargaining disputes. Surveys were returned by 90 school superintendents and 74 union presidents from districts that had used the procedures during the last contract negotiations. The group values variables of perceived neutrality of, and trust in, third parties were most predictive of procedural justice judgments. Process control was also predictive of procedural justice judgments, whereas decision control was not. Neither model was predictive of distributive justice judgments. Further, the path analysis clearly indicates the importance in this context of examining procedural and distributive justice from the competing perspectives of labor and management. Labor/management affiliation was strongly related to trust in third parties, perceptions of relative pay, and overall distributive justice judgments.     

The impact of justice climate and justice orientation on work outcomes: a cross-level multifoci framework

In this article, which takes a person-situation approach, the authors propose and test a cross-level multifoci model of workplace justice. They crossed 3 types of justice (procedural, informational, and interpersonal) with 2 foci (organization and supervisor) and aggregated to the group level to create 6 distinct justice climate variables. They then tested for the effects of these variables on either organization-directed or supervisor-directed commitment, satisfaction, and citizenship behavior. The authors also tested justice orientation as a moderator of these relationships. The results, based on 231 employees constituting 44 work groups representing multiple organizations and occupations, revealed that 4 forms of justice climate (organization-focused procedural and informational justice climate and supervisor-focused procedural and interpersonal justice climate) were significantly related to various work outcomes after controlling for corresponding individual-level justice perceptions. In addition, some moderation effects were found. Implications for organizations and future research are discussed.     

PROCEDURAL AND DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE IN THE EDITORIAL REVIEW PROCESS

Based on organizational justice theories, a model of procedural and distributive justice is proposed to explain authors' reactions to editorial decisions and the editorial review process. Authors ( n = 106) provided justice perceptions and future journal submission intentions upon receiving an editorial decision letter. The editor provided information on editorial decisions and review processes. Explanation and interpersonal sensitivity were important procedural justice dimensions in predicting distributive justice reactions and intentions to submit future work to the journal. Explanations appear particularly important when the decision is negative. Journal submission intentions were positively related to distributive justice reactions for inexperienced, but not experienced, authors. In addition, journal submission intentions were positively related to the perceived explanation received for experienced, but not inexperienced, authors. Discussion focuses on implications for organizational justice theories and for journal publishing and HR practices.     

Procedural justice and the hedonic principle: how approach versus avoidance motivation influences the psychology of voice

The authors investigate the relation between the hedonic principle (people's motivations to approach pleasure and to avoid pain) and procedural justice. They explore whether approach or avoidance motivation increases the effect that people feel they were treated more fairly following procedures that do versus do not allow them an opportunity to voice their opinion. Experiments 1 and 2 reveal that these procedures influence procedural justice judgments more strongly when people conduct approach motor action (arm flexion) than when they conduct avoidance motor action (arm extension). Experiment 3 indicates that individual-difference measures of participants' approach motivations predicted procedural justice judgments following voice versus no-voice procedures. The authors conclude that people's motivational orientations stimulate their fairness-based reactions to voice procedures.     

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.     

公正的启发理论述评

组织公正感包括分配公正、程序公正、互动公正等重要的组成要素。尽管这些公正感的构成要素有不同的内涵和影响因素,然而在许多情况下,这些要素之间有较高的一致性。与过去注重这些要素的差异性相反,Lind看到了这些公正感要素之间的一致性,提出了试图整合这些一致性的公正理论：公正的启发理论。该文比较全面地介绍了公正的启发理论的含义,如何启发等核心概念,并对启发理论存在的问题进行了分析,指出了启发理论研究的方向。     

Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.

The field of organizational justice continues to be marked by several important research questions, including the size of relationships among justice dimensions, the relative importance of different justice criteria, and the unique effects of justice dimensions on key outcomes. To address such questions, the authors conducted a meta-analytic review of 183 justice studies. The results suggest that although different justice dimensions are moderately to highly related, they contribute incremental variance explained in fairness perceptions. The results also illustrate the overall and unique relationships among distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice and several organizational outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commitment, evaluation of authority, organizational citizenship behavior, withdrawal, performance). These findings are reviewed in terms of their implications for future research on organizational justice.     

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.     

The egocentric nature of procedural justice: Social value orientation as moderator of reactions to decision-making procedures

In four studies, the authors investigated the individual-oriented versus social-oriented nature of procedural justice effects by comparing fairness-based responses to decision-making procedures among proself versus prosocial oriented individuals. In Studies 1 through 3, we measured participants’ social value orientation and manipulated whether or not they were granted or denied voice in a decision-making process. Results consistently revealed that the effects of voice versus no-voice on fairness-based perceptions, emotions, and behavioral intentions were significantly more pronounced for individuals with proself orientations than for individuals with prosocial orientations. These findings were extended in Study 4, a field study in which perceived procedural justice was a stronger predictor of satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors among proselfs than among prosocials. These findings suggest that procedural justice effects can be accounted for by self-oriented motives or needs, rather than prosocial motives that are often conceptualized as being associated with justice.     

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.     

Workplace justice, citizenship behavior, and turnover intentions in a union context: examining the mediating role of perceived union support and union instrumentality

This study examined the relationship between workplace justice afforded by the grievance system and the union outcomes of citizenship behavior and turnover intentions and the mechanisms that underpin these relationships. Respondents (N = 187) were members of a large public sector union in Singapore. Results revealed that perceived union support and union instrumentality fully mediated the relationship between the dimensions of workplace justice and citizenship behavior directed toward the union (OCBO) and citizenship behavior directed at other union members (OCBI). Union instrumentality partially mediated the procedural justice-turnover intentions relationship.     

Group belongingness and procedural justice: social inclusion and exclusion by peers affects the psychology of voice

The authors focus on the relation between group membership and procedural justice. They argue that whether people are socially included or excluded by their peers influences their reactions to unrelated experiences of procedural justice. Findings from 2 experiments corroborate the prediction that reactions to voice as opposed to no-voice procedures are affected more strongly when people are included in a group than when they are excluded from a group. These findings are extended with a 3rd experiment that shows that people who generally experience higher levels of inclusion in their lives respond more strongly to voice as opposed to no-voice procedures. It is concluded that people's reactions to procedural justice are moderated by people's level of inclusion in social groups.     

Exchange fairness and employee performance: An examination of the relationship between organizational politics and procedural justice

Data obtained from a manufacturing firm and a newspaper firm in India were used to examine the relationship between organizational politics and procedural justice in three separate studies. Study 1 constructively replicated research on the distinctiveness of the two constructs. Confirmatory factor analyses in which data from the manufacturing firm served as the development sample and data from the newspaper firm served as the validation sample demonstrated the distinctiveness of organizational politics and procedural justice. Study 2 examined the antecedents of the two constructs using data from the manufacturing firm. Structural equation modeling (SEM) results revealed formalization and participation in decision making to be positively related to procedural justice but negatively related to organizational politics. Further, authority hierarchy and spatial distance were positively related to organizational politics but unrelated to procedural justice. Study 3 examined the consequences of the two constructs in terms of task and contextual performance using data from the newspaper firm. Results of SEM analysis revealed procedural justice but not organizational politics to be related to task performance and the contextual performance dimensions of interpersonal facilitation and job dedication.     

The biological bases of unfairness: Neuroimaging evidence for the distinctiveness of procedural and distributive justice

A classic debate in the organizational justice literature concerns the question of whether procedural justice and distributive justice are independent constructs. We investigate this question by using fMRI methods to examine brain activation patterns associated with procedural and distributive unfairness. We observed a clear dissociation of activation between these two forms of justice, and only a minimal amount of shared activation in the hypothesized regions. Specifically, unfair procedures evoked greater activation in parts of the brain related to social cognition, such as the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (VLPFC) and the superior temporal sulcus (STS), whereas unfair outcomes evoked greater activation in more emotional areas of the brain, such as the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), anterior insula (AI) and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). We interpret the findings as supporting the notion that the two forms of justice reflect distinct constructs, while recognizing that, as forms of justice, they are closely related nomologically.     

Gender and mental health: An examination of procedural justice in a specialized court context

The procedural justice framework has been applied in the criminal justice contexts of policing, corrections, and courts. According to this perspective, fair treatment, respectful dialogue and being given a proper voice will contribute to citizens' positive views of authority figures. While this literature has grown immensely, several questions remain unanswered. Do males and females perceive similar levels of procedural justice? Does mental health status influence perceptions of fair treatment? Whether procedural justice is a general perspective that can be applied across social groupings has important implications for correctional treatment in that programs that truly “work” for all are more cost‐effective. Toward that end, the current study investigates the relationships among procedural justice perceptions, gender, and mental health status in specialized drug courts, a context that has received little empirical attention. We do so using secondary data originally collected between 2003 and 2009 for Rossman, Roman, Zweig, Rempel and Lindquist's Multisite Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE). Results from a full‐sample analysis reveal that women report higher levels of procedural justice; that drug court participation significantly influences procedural justice perceptions; and that depressive symptomology is a significant predictor of procedural justice perceptions. In male‐ and female‐specific subsamples, drug court participation exerts similar effects for males and females, as does depressive symptomology. Implications for theory, research, and practice are discussed.     

The relationships between justice perceptions, trust, and employee attitudes in a downsized organization

The authors examined perceptions of distributive justice, procedural justice, trust, organizational commitment, organizational satisfaction, and turnover intentions among survivors in an organization that had recently completed an organizational downsizing. Results suggested that trust partially mediated the relationship between distributive justice and both organizational satisfaction and affective commitment. Additionally, the relationship between procedural justice and turnover intentions was mediated by trust perceptions.     

"All in a day's work": how follower individual differences and justice perceptions predict OCB role definitions and behavior

The authors draw on theories of social exchange and prosocial behavior to explain how employee perceptions of procedural justice and individual differences in reciprocation wariness, empathic concern, and perspective taking function jointly as determinants of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) role definitions and behavior. As hypothesized, empirical findings from a field study show both direct and interactive effects of procedural justice perceptions and individual differences on OCB role definition. In turn, OCB role definitions not only predict OCB directly but also moderate the effects of procedural justice perceptions on OCB. The authors explore the implications of these findings for practice as well as research.