Predicting Satisfaction and Outcome Acceptance with Advisory Committee Meetings: The Role of Procedural Justice1

Research on procedural justice shows that when people view procedures as fair, they are more satisfied with the process and accepting of the outcomes. The group value model, in particular, argues that people care about procedural justice because it communicates whether those in charge are neutral, trustworthy, and respectful of people's rights. This study tested the group value model using survey data from people attending U.S. Food and Drug Administration advisory committee meetings. The results confirmed a strong role for procedural justice, even when controlling for procedural knowledge, tolerance for potential conflicts of interest among committee members, and respondents' stakes in the outcomes. [T]o seem to be just to the disappointed participant, to retain his allegiance, this must surely be one of the more difficult tests that a decision-making system can undergo (Thibaut & Walker, 1975, p. 68).

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

[2]  T. Tyler,et al.  Understanding why the justice of group procedures matters: A test of the psychological dynamics of the group-value model. , 1996 .

[3]  Measuring Fairness in Citizen Participation: A Case Study of Moose Management , 1999 .

[4]  Donald E. Conlon,et al.  Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[5]  J. Colquitt.  On the dimensionality of organizational justice: a construct validation of a measure. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  J. B. Fuller,et al.  A closer look at the relationship between justice perceptions and union participation. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[7]  R. Lance Holbert,et al.  A Monte Carlo Simulation of Observable Versus Latent Variable Structural Equation Modeling Techniques , 2003, Commun. Res..

[8]  P. Sweeney,et al.  Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes. , 1992 .

[9]  G. Leventhal.  What Should Be Done with Equity Theory , 1980 .

[10]  Tom R. Tyler,et al.  Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. , 1994 .

[11]  Bryan J. Weiner,et al.  Management and Governance Processes in Community Health Coalitions: A Procedural Justice Perspective , 2002, Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education.

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

[13]  J. Cohen,et al.  Trust us to make a difference: ensuring public confidence in the integrity of clinical research. , 2001, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[14]  K. McComas.  Citizen Satisfaction with Public Meetings Used for Risk Communication , 2003 .

[15]  Jean M. Phillips.  Antecedents and Consequences of Procedural Justice Perceptions in Hierarchical Decision-Making Teams , 2002 .