Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
acceptedVersion
Publication Date
11-2007
Abstract
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.
Keywords
Procedural fairness, judgments of responsibility
Discipline
Business | Organizational Behavior and Theory
Research Areas
Organisational Behaviour and Human Resources
Publication
Journal of Applied Psychology
Volume
92
Issue
6
First Page
1657
Last Page
1671
ISSN
0021-9010
Identifier
10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1657
Publisher
American Psychological Association
Citation
BROCKNER, Joel; FISHMAN, Ariel Y.; REB, Jochen; GOLDMAN, Barry M.; SPIEGEL, Scott; and GARDEN, Charlee.
Procedural fairness, outcome favorability, and judgments of an authority's responsibility. (2007). Journal of Applied Psychology. 92, (6), 1657-1671.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/2430
Copyright Owner and License
Authors
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1657