The importance of contextual variables when judging fairness: An examination of counterfactual thoughts and fairness theory

被引:62
作者
Nicklin, Jessica M. [1 ]
Greenbaum, Rebecca [2 ]
McNall, Laurel A. [3 ]
Folger, Robert [4 ]
Williams, Kevin J. [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hartford, Dept Psychol, Hartford, CT 06117 USA
[2] Oklahoma State Univ, Dept Management, Spears Sch Business, Stillwater, OK 74078 USA
[3] SUNY Coll Brockport, Dept Psychol, Brockport, NY 14420 USA
[4] Univ Cent Florida, Dept Management, Coll Business Adm, Orlando, FL 32816 USA
[5] SUNY Albany, Dept Psychol, Albany, NY 12222 USA
关键词
Organizational justice; Fairness perceptions; Counterfactual thinking; ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE; RELATIVE IMPORTANCE; JUDGMENTS; RESPONSIBILITY; SATISFACTION; PSYCHOLOGY; SELECTION; EQUITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.10.007
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
This research empirically examines the underlying mechanisms of fairness theory (Folger & Cropanzano, 1998, 2001), namely counterfactual thought processes. Study 1 used a policy-capturing design to examine the relative importance of contextual variables in predicting counterfactual thoughts and fairness perceptions. Study 2 utilized a between-subjects design and asked participants to generate their own. counterfactuals in response to an unfortunate event. Results of both studies showed that fairness perceptions are influenced by contextual variables (i.e., outcome severity, target knowledge and expertise, sin of commission vs. omission) and counterfactual thinking. Counterfactual thoughts partially mediated the effects of contextual variables and fairness perceptions in Study 1. Exploratory analyses from Study 3 revealed that the measurement of counterfactual thoughts (frequency vs. strength) may capture different underlying constructs. Implications are discussed. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:127 / 141
页数:15
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]  
ADAMS JS, 1965, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V2, P267
[2]   The Role of Overall Justice Judgments in Organizational Justice Research: A Test of Mediation [J].
Ambrose, Maureen L. ;
Schminke, Marshall .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2009, 94 (02) :491-500
[3]  
Ambrose ML, 2005, HANDBOOK OF ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, P59
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2002, EXPT QUASIEXPERIMENT
[5]   Exploring the role of emotions in injustice perceptions and retaliation [J].
Barclay, LJ ;
Skarlicki, DP ;
Pugh, SD .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2005, 90 (04) :629-643
[6]   THE MODERATOR MEDIATOR VARIABLE DISTINCTION IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL-RESEARCH - CONCEPTUAL, STRATEGIC, AND STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS [J].
BARON, RM ;
KENNY, DA .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 51 (06) :1173-1182
[7]  
BIES RobertJ., 1986, Research on negotiation in organizations, P43, DOI DOI 10.1111/J.1559-1816.2004.TB02581.X
[8]   The effects of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice on postcomplaint behavior [J].
Blodgett, JG ;
Hill, DJ ;
Tax, SS .
JOURNAL OF RETAILING, 1997, 73 (02) :185-210
[9]   Procedural fairness, outcome favorability, and judgments of an authority's responsibility [J].
Brockner, Joel ;
Fishman, Ariel Y. ;
Reb, Jochen ;
Goldman, Barry ;
Spiegel, Scott ;
Garden, Charlee .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2007, 92 (06) :1657-1671
[10]   The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis [J].
Cohen-Charash, Y ;
Spector, PE .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 2001, 86 (02) :278-321