Procedural Justice and Culture

The past fifteen years have seen the development of a considerable research literature on the social psychology of procedural justice (see Lind & Tyler, 1988, for a review). Procedural justice research reveals some serious shortcomings in the exchange theories that have traditionally dominated Western analyses of the social psychology of groups, and in so doing, the procedural justice literature has important ramifications for cross-cultural psychology. Results from a number of studies conducted in the United States and Western Europe show that individualistic, self-interest based models of human behaviour are insufficient to explain procedural justice phenomena. Instead, procedural justice effects frequently reveal strong group-oriented concerns and motivations even in cultural contexts generally thought to be characterized by individualistic orientations. The research literature also shows that if a group's procedures are judged to be fair, people are more likely to show group-oriented behaviour and to hold more favourable attitudes toward the group and its leaders. These findings have led to the development of a theory of justice judgments—the Lind and Tyler group-value theory—which is based on group norms and relations rather than on social exchange theory. We describe a general model of social behaviour that integrates group- and individually-oriented behaviour, and we discuss the implications of the model for social and cross-cultural psychology.     

Nonlinear and Nonmonotonic Effects of Outcome on Procedural and Distributive Fairness Judgments1

It has generally been assumed that increases in the concrete outcomes of a procedure will result in judgments of greater procedural and distributive fairness, but research on this topic has been inconsistent. Using a classic procedural justice paradigm (Walker, LaTour, Lind, &. Thibaut, 1974), the experiment tested the effects of four levels of outcome. Forty-eight male and female undergraduates were led to believe that their team had been wrongfully charged with cheating in a business simulation game. An adversary adjudication was held, purportedly to resolve the charge. The outcome of the adjudication was confiscation of all, two thirds, one third, or none of the subject's monetary winnings from the game. Both procedural and distributive fairness measures showed dear nonlinear outcome effects. The relationship between outcomes and both fairness measures showed some evidence of being nonmonotonic as well: A two-thirds loss resulted in less favorable reactions than did a total loss. Ratings on other scales suggest that the nonlinear effects are due to beliefs that the judge did not fully consider the evidence in the two-thirds loss and one-third loss conditions. The discussion focuses on the theoretical implications of the findings for procedural justice and social exchange processes and the practical implications for conflict resolution procedure.     

Attention and personality in augmenting/reducing of visual evoked potentials

Earlier research has shown that extraverts tend to increase their visual evoked potential amplitudes with increasing light intensity (augmenting), while introverts reach their maximum amplitude at lower intensities (reducing). The evoked response has normally been measured from association areas of the brain (at the vertex). The present study measured VEP amplitudes over visual cortex and at the vertex, using four light intensities in two conditions, where attention was either directed towards the light stimuli, or away from them by a concurrent auditory task. Forty subjects were classified as extraverts or introverts based on the Eysenck Personality Inventory. The results show that attention interacted significantly with extraversion. Introverts exhibited a narrower focus of attention, while higher amplitudes and amplitude-intensity functions when attending to the light flashes and lower when distracted. Extraverts showed smaller differences between conditions, indicating a more evenly distributed attention. Higher arousal in introverts is the probable cause of their narrower focus of attention. There were marked differences in the distribution of activity between vertex and occipital cortex. Introverts showed relatively stronger occipital responses and extraverts stronger vertex responses across all intensities and in both conditions. The predisposition for mainly perceptual responses to aversive stimuli in introverts, and for general alerting and motor preparatory responses in extraverts, are interpreted as supportive of Brebner and Cooper's hypothesis that introverts are ‘geared to inspect’ and extraverts are ‘geared to respond’.     

Perceiving motion and rigid structure from optic flow: A combined weak-perspective and polar-perspective approach

Structure-from-motion algorithms based on weak-perspective projection have many interesting properties and could serve as a basis for a model of human perception of motion and structure from motion (M&SFM). There is some psychophysical evidence, however, that points to discrepancies between what can be accomplished with these algorithms and the performance of human subjects in certain M&SFM tasks. In light of this evidence, this paper presents a mechanism that both takes advantage of all the possibilities offered by a weak-perspective approach and behaves in a manner that is in close correspondence with human performance in M&SFM tasks. It consists of a novel weak-perspective—based method operating at small visual angles and a complementary, perspective-projection—based method operating at larger visual angles.     

Decision Control and Process Control Effects on Procedural Fairness Judgments1

Process control, the capacity to influence the content of a conflict resolution hearing, has been found repeatedly to affect disputants' judgments of the fairness of conflict resolution procedures, but never has there been an unambiguous test of the effect in nonbinding procedures. It was hypothesized that disputants experiencing nonbinding conflict resolution procedures, as well as those experiencing binding conflict resolution, would judge as more fair procedures high in disputant process control. One hundred nineteen undergraduate males and females were placed in apparent conflict with other suhjects. The procedure used to resolve the conflict was either high or low in disputant process control and was either binding or nonbinding. The outcome of the conflict resolution procedure was either favorable or unfavordblc to the subject. High disputant process control procedures were judged more fair than low disputant process control procedures regardless of whether the decision was binding, confirming the hypothesis. The results support new applications of procedural fairness theory and research and encourage testing of process control-like variables in nonlegal settings.     

Misalignment Between Research Hypotheses and Statistical Hypotheses: A Threat to Evidence-Based Medicine?

Topoi - Evidence-based medicine frequently uses statistical hypothesis testing. In this paradigm, data can only disconfirm a research hypothesis’ competitors: One tests the negation...