Comparing three processes underlying judgments of procedural justice : a field study of mediation and arbitration

A natural setting in which 158 coal miners who had filed grievances were assigned to either mediation or arbitration was used to test a model of 3 mediating processes underlying judgments of procedural justice: instrumental, noninstrumental, and procedural enactment. The generality of these processes was tested across procedures varying objectively in the degree of disputants' outcome control, across contexts in which disputes rather than decisions were resolved, and across situations in which the grievance was won, lost, or compromised as a result of the dispute resolution procedure. All 3 processes consistently accounted for judgments of procedural justice in all but 1 of these circumstances (instrumental processes did not account for procedural justice when grievants won)

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

[2]  John Thibaut,et al.  A Theory of Procedure , 1978 .

[3]  J. Brett,et al.  Disputants' perspectives on the differences between mediation and arbitration , 1990 .

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

[5]  J. Brett,et al.  Grievance Mediation in the Coal Industry: A Field Experiment , 1983 .

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

[7]  J. Thibaut,et al.  Preference for Modes of Dispute Resolution as a Function of Process and Decision Control. , 1978 .

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

[9]  G. W. Bradley.  Self-serving biases in the attribution process: A reexamination of the fact or fiction question. , 1978 .

[10]  Donald E. Conlon,et al.  Decision Control and Process Control Effects on Procedural Fairness Judgments1 , 1983 .

[11]  R. Lewicki.  Research on Negotiation in Organizations , 1990 .

[12]  E. Langer.  The Psychology Of Control , 1983 .

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

[14]  Pruitt,et al.  Mediation Research: The Process and Effectiveness of Third-Party Intervention , 1989 .

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

[16]  Larry L. Cummings,et al.  Causal Accounts and Managing Organizational Conflict , 1988 .

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

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

[19]  Scott H. Decker,et al.  Law and Society Review , 1979 .

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