Procedural fairness and self-esteem

We argue that people's self-esteem is affected by the fairness of procedures to which they are subjected; unfair treatment will lower self-esteem. Moreover, since this influence on self-esteem is presumably due to the implicit evaluation expressed by the choice of procedure and hence by the evaluation expressed by the person implementing the procedure, people's concern with the fairness of treatment will be focused on the interactional aspects of the procedure. In two experiments designed to test these hypotheses subjects received either a high or a low grade on an ability test on the basis of either fair or unfair grading procedures. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that subjects' self-esteem was lower after unfair treatment, and this influence was only apparent when subjects received high test feedback. Additionally, ratings of the fairness of the interaction were lower following unfair grading procedures. Experiment 2 also manipulated level of involvement with the test. Self-esteem was affected by procedural fairness and procedural fairness influenced perceived fairness of the interaction only in the high involvement condition.

[1]  P. Christopher Earley,et al.  Procedural justice and participation in task selection: The role of control in mediating justice judgments. , 1987 .

[2]  Tom R. Tyler,et al.  What is procedural justice? Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures. , 1988 .

[3]  Stuart S. Nagel,et al.  Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis , 1976 .

[4]  E. Lind,et al.  Procedure and Outcome Effects on Reactions to Adjudicated Resolution of Conflicts of Interest , 1980 .

[5]  Tom R. Tyler,et al.  Conditions leading to value-expressive effects in judgments of procedural justice: A test of four models. , 1987 .

[6]  Robert E. Lane,et al.  Procedural goods in a democracy: How one is treated versus what one gets , 1988 .

[7]  John Thibaut,et al.  The Relation between Procedural and Distributive Justice , 1979 .

[8]  Tom R. Tyler,et al.  Influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders: Exploring the meaning of process control. , 1985 .

[9]  Debra L. Shapiro,et al.  Interactional fairness judgments: The influence of causal accounts , 1987 .

[10]  R. Folger.  Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of voice and improvement on experienced inequity. , 1977 .

[11]  Marian N. Ruderman,et al.  The role of procedural and distributive justice in organizational behavior , 1987 .

[12]  M. Mark.  Expectations, procedural justice, and alternative reactions to being deprived of a desired outcome , 1985 .

[13]  T. Tyler,et al.  The influence of outcomes and procedures on satisfaction with formal leaders. , 1981 .

[14]  T. Tyler.  The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. , 1989 .

[15]  Tom R. Tyler,et al.  Distributional and Procedural Aspects of Satisfaction With Citizen-Police Encounters , 1980 .

[16]  Equity/Inequity, and Self-Esteem: A Reassessment , 1988 .

[17]  J. Greenberg.  Using diaries to promote procedural justice in performance appraisals , 1987 .

[18]  P. Earley,et al.  Fairness and participation in evaluation procedures: Effects on task attitudes and performance , 1987 .

[19]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  P. Earley,et al.  Voice, control, and procedural justice : instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments , 1990 .

[21]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  Determinants of Perceived Fairness of Performance Evaluations , 1986 .

[22]  Tom R. Tyler,et al.  The Role of Perceived Injustice in Defendants' Evaluations of Their Courtroom Experience , 1984 .

[23]  T. Tyler,et al.  The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice , 1988 .

[24]  M. Rosenberg.  Society and the adolescent self-image , 1966 .