Social Justice Research

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 479–492 | Cite as

Anxiety-Based Personal Values and Perceived Organizational Justice

  • Elisabeth EnoksenEmail author
  • Gro Mjeldheim Sandal


This study examined the influence of personal values on employees’ perceptions of organizational justice. Specifically, we tested whether anxiety-based values explain greater variance in perceived organizational justice compared to anxiety-free values. Employees of a health organization (N = 224) in Norway completed the Organizational Justice Scale and the Portrait Values Questionnaire. Results from multiple regression analysis showed that anxiety-based values (power, achievement, security, conformity, and tradition) explained a significant portion of the variance in employees’ perceptions of organizational justice, whereas anxiety-free values did not (hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, and benevolence). Power and tradition were the only anxiety-based values that significantly contributed to explain variance in justice perceptions. People with a high score on these values tended to score high on organizational justice. Taken together, the present findings suggest that employees may perceive and interpret organizational processes differently based on their value schema.


Organizational justice Personal values Anxiety-based values Uncertainty management 



We thank Professor Oluf Langhelle and Professor Knud Knudsen at the University of Stavanger for helpful guidance on the early versions of this manuscript, and for statistical advice throughout the process.


  1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. E. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 2 (pp. 267–299). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  2. Bardi, A., & Goodwin, R. (2011). The dual route to value change: Individual processes and cultural moderators. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(2), 271–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  4. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. American Psychological Association, 86(3), 386–400.Google Scholar
  5. Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425–445.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Judge, T. A., & Shaw, J. C. (2006). Justice and personality: Using integrative theories to derive moderators of justice effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 110–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., & Conlon, D. E. (2013). Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect based Perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 199–236.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. De Hoogh, A. H. B., Den Hartog, D. N., Koopman, P. L., Thierry, H., Van den Berg, P. T., Van der Weide, J. G., et al. (2005). Leader motives, charismatic leadership, and subordinates’ work attitude in the profit and voluntary sector. Leadership Quarterly, 16(1), 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Desai, S. D., Sondak, H., & Diekmann, K. A. (2011). When fairness neither satisfies nor motivates: The role of risk aversion and uncertainty reduction in attenuating and reversing the fair process effect. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(1), 32–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Enoksen, E. (2015). Examining the dimensionality of Colquitt’s organizational justice scale in a public health sector context. Psychological Reports, 116(3), 723–737.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Greenberg, J. (1993). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 79–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Groves, R. M. (2006). Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70(5), 646–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guinote, A. (2007). Power affects basic cognition: Increased attentional inhibition and flexibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(5), 685–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Halsleben, J. R., & Whitman, M. V. (2013). Evaluating survey quality in health services research: A decision framework for assessing nonresponse bias. Health Service Research, 48(3), 913–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heponiemi, T., Menderbacka, K., Vänskä, J., & Elovainio, M. (2013). Can organizational justice help the retention of general practitioners? Health Policy, 110, 22–28.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hertel, G., Aarts, H., & Zeelenberg, M. (2002). What do you think is ‘fair’? Effects of ingroup norms and outcome control on fairness judgments. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 327–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. IBM Corp. Released. (2012). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, version 21.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.Google Scholar
  18. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.8 for Windows [computer software]. Skokie, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Leventhal, G. S. (1976). The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organizations. In L. Berkowitz & W. Walster (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 91–131). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  20. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, & R. Willis (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 27–55). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heusristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 55–88). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lind, E. A., & van den Bos, K. (2002). When fairness works: Toward a general theory of uncertainty management. Research in Organizational Behavior, 24, 181–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lipponen, J., Olkkonen, M.-E., & Myyry, L. (2004). Personal value orientation as a moderator in the relationships between perceived organizational justice and its hypothesized consequences. Social Justice Research, 17(3), 275–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McClelland, D. C., & Burnham, D. H. (1976). Power is the great motivator. Harvard Business Review, 81(1), 117–126.Google Scholar
  25. Miedema, J., van den Bos, K., & Vermunt, R. (2006). The influence of self-threats on fairness judgments and affective measures. Social Justice Research, 19(2), 228–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nowakowski, J. M., & Conlon, D. E. (2005). Organizational justice: Looking back, looking forward. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 16(1), 4–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Robbins, J. M., Ford, M. T., & Tetrick, L. E. (2012). Perceived unfairness and employee health: A meta-analytical integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 235–272.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Saksvik, P. Ø., Tvedt, S. D., Nytrø, K., Andersen, G. R., Andersen, T. K., Buvik, M. P., & Torvatn, H. (2007). Developing criteria for healthy organizational change. Work & Stress, 21(3), 243–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Schwartz, S. H. (2006). Les valeurs de base de la personne: Théorie, mesures et applications [Basic human values: Theory, measurement, and applications]. Revue Francaise de Sosiologie, 47, 249–288.Google Scholar
  31. Schwartz, S. H. (2007). Value orientations: Measurement, antecedents and consequences across nations. In R. Jowell, C. Roberts, R. Fitzgerald, & G. Eva (Eds.), Measuring attitudes cross-nationally—lessons from the European Social Survey. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture. doi: 10.9707/2307-0919.1116.Google Scholar
  33. Schwartz, S. H. (n.d.). Computing scores for the 10 human values. European Social Survey. Accessed 14 Jan 2014.
  34. Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 519–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Seppälä, T., Lipponen, J., Bardi, A., & Pirttilä-Backman, A.-M. (2012). Change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior: An interactive product of openness to change values, work unit identification, and sense of power. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85, 135–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shapiro, D. L., Buttner, E. H., & Barry, B. (1994). Explanations: What factors enhance their perceived adequacy? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 346–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shi, J., Lin, H., Wang, L., & Wang, M. (2009). Linking the big five personality constructs to organizational justice. Social Behavior and Personality, 37(2), 209–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Skitka, L. J. (2009). Exploring the “Lost and Found” of justice theory and research. Social Justice Research, 22, 98–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Templeton, L., Deenhan, A., Taylor, C., Drummond, C., & Strang, J. (1997). Surveying general practitioners: Does a low response rate matter? The British Journal of General Practice, 47(415), 91–94.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Tenhiälä, A., Linna, A., von Bonsdorff, M., Pentti, J., Vahtera, J., Kivimäki, M., & Elovainio, M. (2013). Organizational justice, sickness absence and employee age. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(7), 805–825.Google Scholar
  41. Tessema, M. T., Tsegai, G., Ready, K., Embaye, A., & Windrow, B. (2014). Effect of employee background on perceived organizational justice: Managerial implications. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 80(2), 443–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  43. Van de Bos, K. (2009). Making sense of life: The existential self trying to deal with personal uncertainty. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 197–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Van den Bos, K. (2001). Uncertainty management: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 931–941.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Van den Bos, K., & Miedema, J. (2000). Toward understanding why fairness matters: The influence of mortality salience on reactions to procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 355–366.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang, Q., & Yao, Y. (2011). The impact of cultural differences on applicants perceived fairness 2011. International Conference on Management and Service Science (MASS), IEEE, China. doi: 10.1109/ICMSS.2011.5998042.
  47. Winter, D. G. (1991). A motivational model of leadership: Predicting long-term management success from TAT measures of power motivation and responsibility. The Leadership Quarterly, 2(2), 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yukl, G. A. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Media, Culture and Social SciencesUniversity of StavangerStavangerNorway
  2. 2.Department of Psychosocial ScienceUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations