Four-factor justice and daily job satisfaction: A multilevel investigation.

This study examined the differential effects of 4 types of organizational justice on daily job satisfaction at between- and within-individual levels. Specifically, the authors predicted that interpersonal justice and informational justice would exhibit meaningful daily variations and would have direct impacts on individuals’ job satisfaction on a daily basis. They further theorized that distributive justice and procedural justice at a between-person level would moderate the within-person relationships. The authors used hierarchical linear modeling to test their hypotheses with a sample of 231 full-time employees in Hong Kong over the course of 25 working days. The results showed that both daily interpersonal and informational justice were positively related to daily job satisfaction. As hypothesized, between-individual distributive justice moderated the relationship between daily interpersonal justice and daily job satisfaction, and between-individual procedural justice moderated the relationship between daily informational justice and daily job satisfaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation.

Organizational justice research traditionally focuses on the unique predictability of different types of justice (distributive, procedural, and interactional) and the relative importance of these types of justice on outcome variables. Recently, researchers have suggested shifting from this focus on specific types of justice to a consideration of overall justice. The authors hypothesize that overall justice judgments mediate the relationship between specific justice facets and outcomes. They present 2 studies to test this hypothesis. Study 1 demonstrates that overall justice judgments mediate the relationship between specific justice judgments and employee attitudes. Study 2 demonstrates the mediating relationship holds for supervisor ratings of employee behavior. Implications for research on organizational justice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure.

This study explores the dimensionality of organizational justice and provides evidence of construct validity for a new justice measure. Items for this measure were generated by strictly following the seminal works in the justice literature. The measure was then validated in 2 separate studies. Study 1 occurred in a university setting, and Study 2 occurred in a field setting using employees in an automobile parts manufacturing company. Confirmatory factor analyses supported a 4-factor structure to the measure, with distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice as distinct dimensions. This solution fit the data significantly better than a 2- or 3-factor solution using larger interactional or procedural dimensions. Structural equation modeling also demonstrated predictive validity for the justice dimensions on important outcomes, including leader evaluation, rule compliance, commitment, and helping behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Organizational Justice and Black Applicants' Reactions to Affirmative Action.

Using organizational justice as a guiding framework, the authors studied perceptions of affirmative action programs by presumed beneficiaries. Three conceptual issues were addressed: (a) the content of different affirmative action plans; (b) the 3-way interaction among distributive, procedural, and interactional justice; and (c) the distinction between outcome favorability and distributive justice. These ideas were tested with a sample of Black engineering students who responded to 1 of 6 plans. Participants distinguished among the various plans, with some policies being viewed as more fair than others. In addition, a 3-way interaction among the 3 types of organizational justice was observed. Specifically, the 2-way interaction between distributive and interactional fairness was only significant when procedural justice was low. Implications for organizational justice and for the design of affirmative action programs are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A longitudinal analysis of organizational fairness: An examination of reactions to tenure and promotion decisions.

Most organizational justice research takes a cross-sectional approach to examining the relationship between perceived fairness and individuals' attitudes. This study examines the effect of procedural and distributive justice over time. It is suggested that individuals acquire more information and experience with procedures and outcomes over time. These changes in information and experience affect the influence of procedural and distributive justice on organizational attitudes. Faculty perceptions of tenure and promotion decisions were assessed 3 times (preallocation, short-term postallocation, long-term postallocation) over a 2-year period. Results generally supported the hypotheses. Procedural justice was most influential prior to and soon after outcome decisions were made. Distributive justice was most influential 1 year later. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Claiming in the name of fairness: Organizational justice and the decision to file for workplace injury compensation.

This article explored the relationship among injured workers' perceptions of workplace justice (i.e., distributive, interactional, and procedural), perceptions of employers' disability-related policies, and the decision to file a workers' compensation claim. Using a 2-wave sample of 1,077 workers with repetitive motion injuries, the authors tested a structural equation model. Results revealed that Time 1 interactional justice was negatively related to filing a claim, whereas Time 1 distributive justice was positively related to perceptions of employer disability-related practices measured a year after the date of injury report. At Time 2, the claim decision was unrelated to perceptions of justice, yet perceptions of disability-related practices were significantly related to all 3 types of justice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice.

Two psychological theories consider why people care about justice. The social-exchange-based resource model argues that people want to maximize the resources they obtain from social interactions, a goal that they believe is facilitated by following rules of distributive and procedural justice; the identity-based relational model suggests that people attempt to maintain high status within groups and use the justice of their experiences to evaluate their group status. Two studies on reactions to experiences with authorities (legal and managerial) examine the influence of these motives on (1) people's evaluations of the distributive and procedural justice of their experiences and (2) affective and behavioral reactions to those experiences. Results support a model in which relational issues dominate definitions of justice. Whereas distributive justice judgments are shaped by both resource and relational judgments, procedural justice judgments are shaped by relational concerns. The findings suggest two distinct justice motives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Got political skill? The impact of justice on the importance of political skill for job performance.

The present study examined the moderating effects of procedural and distributive justice on the relationships between political skill and task performance and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) among 175 supervisor–subordinate dyads of a government organization. Using Mischel’s (1968) situationist perspective, high justice conditions were considered “strong situations,” whereas low justice conditions were construed as “weak situations.” We found that when both procedural and distributive justice were low, political skill was positively related to performance. Under conditions of both high procedural and high distributive justice, political skill was negatively related to performance. Finally, under conditions of low distributive justice, political skill was positively related to OCB, whereas under conditions of high distributive justice, political skill had little effect on OCB. These results highlight the importance of possessing political skill in weak but not strong situations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice.

The authors investigated the relationship between organizational justice and organizational retaliation behavior—adverse reactions to perceived unfairness by disgruntled employees toward their employer—in a sample of 240 manufacturing employees. Distributive, procedural, and interactional justice interacted to predict organizational retaliation behavior. A relation between distributive justice and retaliation was found only when there was low interactional and procedural justice. The 2-way interaction of distributive and procedural justice was observed only at a low level of interactional justice, and the 2-way interaction of distributive and interactional justice was observed only at a low level of procedural justice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

How do I judge my outcome when I do not know the outcome of others? The psychology of the fair process effect

On the basis of fairness heuristic theory, the authors provide an explanation of the frequently replicated fair process effect (the finding that perceived procedural fairness positively affects how people react to outcomes). The authors argue that, in many situations, people may find it difficult to assess whether their outcome is fair or unfair and satisfying or unsatisfying because they only have information about their own outcome and they do not know the outcomes of others and that, in these situations, people use the fairness of the procedure as a heuristic substitute to assess how to judge their outcome. The results of 2 experiments corroborate the authors' line of reasoning. Findings are discussed in terms of recent developments toward an integration of the procedural and distributive justice domains.     

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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Distributive justice, procedural justice, and psychological distress: The moderating effect of coworker support and work autonomy.

Recent research has demonstrated that the perception of injustice at work may increase psychological health-related problems. The purpose of this study is to examine the moderating effect of coworker support and work autonomy on the relationships between both distributive and procedural justice and psychological distress. Results, on the basis of responses to questionnaires given to 248 prison employees, show that coworker support moderates the relationships between both forms of justice and psychological distress. Specifically, these relationships are weakened when employees benefit from a high level of coworker support. Furthermore, work autonomy moderates the relationship between procedural justice and psychological distress but not the relationship between distributive justice and psychological distress. Thus, procedural injustice is less likely to increase psychological distress when the level of work autonomy is high. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Relationships Between Organizational Justice and Burnout at the Work-Unit Level.

Relationships between organizational justice and well-being are traditionally investigated at the individual level. This article extends previous efforts by testing such relationships at the work-unit level. Three corridors of influence were examined. First, the level (work units' average scores) of justice is related to the level of burnout. Second, justice climate strength (level of agreement among work-unit members) moderates the predictability of the level of burnout. Third, justice strength is related to burnout strength. The authors interviewed 324 contact employees from 108 work units in 59 service organizations. Findings showed the predominance of interactional justice over distributive and procedural justice in all 3 corridors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Procedural justice as autonomy regulation.

The present research investigated the relation between autonomy (i.e., freedom of choice) and procedural justice. Three studies tested the hypothesis that people would be particularly sensitive to the fairness of decision-making procedures when they experience deprivation of autonomy needs. Study 1 indicated that procedural justice judgments indeed were influenced more strongly by variations in decision-making procedures among participants who experienced little autonomy in their life. In Study 2, these findings were conceptually replicated by manipulating whether participants were provided with choice on an issue that was unrelated to the outcomes of the subsequent decision-making process. Study 3 revealed evidence for the hypothesis in a field setting. It is concluded that procedural justice is functional to regulate basic autonomy needs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The role of color-blind racial attitudes in reactions to racial discrimination on social network sites.

This study examines associations between responses to online racial discrimination, more specifically, racial theme party images on social network sites and color-blind racial attitudes. We showed 217 African American and European American college students images and prompted them to respond as if they were writing on a friend’s “wall” on Facebook or MySpace. Reactions to racial theme party images were not bothered, not bothered-ambivalent, bothered-ambivalent, and bothered. A multinomial logistic regression revealed that participants differed in their reactions to the images based on their racial group and color-blind racial ideology. European Americans and participants high in racial color blindness were more likely to be in the not bothered reaction group. Further, these students were more likely to condone and even encourage the racial theme party practice by laughing at the photos and affirming the party goers. Conversely, those low in color blindness were vocal in their opposition to the images with some reporting that they would “defriend” a person who engaged in the practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

When do fair procedures not matter? A test of the identity violation effect.

Considerable research has demonstrated that fair procedures help improve reactions to decisions, a phenomenon known as the fair process effect. However, in the present research, the authors identify when and why objectively fair procedures (i.e., receiving voice) may not always improve justice perceptions. Findings from 2 studies (Ns = 108 and 277) yield support for the proposed identity violation effect, which posits that when an outcome violates a central aspect of one's self (i.e., personal and/or social identity), objectively fair procedures do not improve procedural and distributive justice perceptions. Further, consistent with the motivated reasoning hypothesis, the Voice × Identity Violation interaction on justice perceptions was mediated by participants' tendency to find a procedural flaw--namely, to doubt that opinions were considered before making the decision. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Can counterproductive work behaviors be productive? CWB as emotion-focused coping.

The goal of our study was to determine whether some forms of counterproductive work behavior (CWB) may serve to benefit employees. Building on the stressor–strain framework and theories of coping, we investigated whether two forms of CWB, production deviance and withdrawal, serve as a means of coping to mitigate the impact of low distributive and procedural justice on emotional exhaustion. Results from a survey of 295 employed persons from around the United States suggest that production deviance and withdrawal may benefit employees by reducing emotional exhaustion in the face of low distributive justice but not necessarily low procedural justice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

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

The field of organizational justice continues to he 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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)