Procedural fairness, outcome favorability, and judgments of an authority's responsibility.

Fairness theory (R. Folger & R. Cropanzano, 1998, 2001) postulates that, particularly in the face of unfavorable outcomes, employees judge an organizational authority to be more responsible for their outcomes when the authority exhibits lower procedural fairness. Three studies lent empirical support to this notion. Furthermore, 2 of the studies showed that attributions of responsibility to the authority mediated the relationship between the authority's procedural fairness and employees' reactions to unfavorable outcomes. The findings (a) provide support for a key assumption of fairness theory, (b) help to account for the pervasive interactive effect of procedural fairness and outcome favorability on employees' attitudes and behaviors, and (c) contribute to an emerging trend in justice research concerned with how people use procedural fairness information to make attributions of responsibility for their outcomes. Practical implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research also are discussed.

[1]  Robert Folger,et al.  Relative deprivation and procedural justifications. , 1983 .

[2]  T. Cook,et al.  Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings , 1979 .

[3]  D. Skarlicki,et al.  Exploring the role of emotions in injustice perceptions and retaliation. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[4]  H. Wilke,et al.  Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. , 1997 .

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

[6]  Paul D. Sweeney,et al.  Process and outcome: gender differences in the assessment of justice , 1997 .

[7]  R. Bies,et al.  The predicament of injustice: The management of moral outrage. , 1987 .

[8]  Lyman W. Porter,et al.  Employee-Organization Linakges: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism and Turnover , 1985 .

[9]  M. Riketta,et al.  Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: a meta‐analysis , 2002 .

[10]  Robert H. Moorman,et al.  Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors : do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship ? , 1991 .

[11]  K. van den Bos,et al.  Sometimes unfair procedures have nice aspects : On the psychology of the fair process effect , 1999 .

[12]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  Handbook of Organizational Justice , 2005 .

[13]  M. Zuckerman,et al.  Attribution of success and failure revisited, or: The motivational bias is alive and well in attribution theory , 1979 .

[14]  J. Edwards.  The Study of Congruence in Organizational Behavior Research: Critique and a Proposed Alternative , 1994 .

[15]  Robert Folger,et al.  Organizational Justice and Human Resource Management , 1998 .

[16]  E. E. Jones,et al.  From Acts To Dispositions The Attribution Process In Person Perception1 , 1965 .

[17]  Markus Groth,et al.  Commitment to legal claiming: influences of attributions, social guidance, and organizational tenure. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[18]  J. Sinacore.  Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions , 1993 .

[19]  P. Blau.  Exchange and Power in Social Life , 1964 .

[20]  Robert J Crutcher,et al.  Telling What We Know: The Use of Verbal Report Methodologies in Psychological Research , 1994 .

[21]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  Procedural Justice, Participation, and the Fair Process Effect in Groups and Organizations , 1983 .

[22]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  What is organizational justice? A historical overview. , 2005 .

[23]  Robert Folger,et al.  Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. , 2001 .

[24]  J. Brockner,et al.  An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. , 1996, Psychological bulletin.

[25]  T. Tyler,et al.  A Relational Model of Authority in Groups , 1992 .

[26]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  Advances in Organizational Justice , 2001 .

[27]  E. Walster,et al.  Assignment of responsibility for an accident. , 1966, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[28]  Paul T. P. Wong,et al.  When people ask "why" questions, and the heuristics of attributional search. , 1981 .

[29]  Paul B. Paulus,et al.  Basic group processes , 1983 .

[30]  J. Thibaut,et al.  Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis , 1976 .

[31]  Christopher L. Martin,et al.  Relative deprivation and referent cognitions , 1983 .

[32]  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.

[33]  John P. Meyer,et al.  The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization , 1990 .

[34]  Christopher L. Martin,et al.  Relative deprivation and referent cognitions: Distributive and procedural justice effects , 1986 .

[35]  Zinta S. Byrne,et al.  Moral Virtues, Fairness Heuristics, Social Entities, and Other Denizens of Organizational Justice. , 2001 .

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

[37]  Austin Sarat,et al.  The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaming, Claiming . . . , 1980 .