Procedural justice as a criterion in allocation decisions.

336 undergraduates considered allocations made within 16 representative types of interpersonal relationships that varied with regard to social-emotional or task basis, cooperative or competitive style of interaction, causal or rule-directed behavior, and power distribution. Ss also rated the importance of 8 allocation criteria, such as objectivity and practicality, and of 6 criteria for judging procedural fairness, such as consistency and correctability. Results suggest that procedural justice was a more important criterion in decisions concerning resource allocations than were a variety of nonfairness criteria and that it was equal in importance to distributive justice. The meaning of procedural justice in allocations and the relation of procedural justice concerns to social allocation goals are explored. (41 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)