Social Justice Research

, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp 177–198 | Cite as

The role of procedural and distributive justice in organizational behavior

  • Sheldon Alexander
  • Marian Ruderman


To investigate the relationship between fairness and organizational outcomes, the present study examined the survey responses of government employees at six Federal installations. Indices of procedural and distributive fairness were factor-analytically derived. Multiple regression analyses indicated that both the procedural measures and the distributive measures were significantly related to measures of job satisfaction, evaluation of supervisor, conflict/harmony, trust in management, and turnover intention. Procedural fairness accounted for significantly more variance than distributive fairness in each of these criterion measures, except for turnover intention. These findings are related to conceptual and methodological issues concerning procedural fairness and organizational behavior.

Key words

procedural justice organizational behavior social psychology 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity.J. Abnor. Soc. Psychol. 67: 422–436.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2, Academic Press, New York, pp. 267–299.Google Scholar
  3. Alexander, S., and Russ, T. L. (1985).Procedural and distributive justice effects: The role of social context. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  4. Blau, P. (1964).Exchange and Power in Social Life John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Bullock, R. J. (1983). Participation and pay.Group Organi. Stud. 8: 127–136.Google Scholar
  6. Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, G. D., Jr., and Klesh, J. R. (1983). Assessing the attitudes and perceptions of organizational members. In Seashore, S. E., Lawler, E. E., III, Mirvis, P., and Cammann, C. (eds.),Assessing Organizational Change, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 71–138.Google Scholar
  7. Carrell, M. R. (1978). A longitudinal field assessment of employee perceptions of equitable treatment.Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf. 21: 108–118.Google Scholar
  8. Coch, L., and French, J. R. P. (1948). Overcoming resistance to change.Hum. Rel. 1: 512–532.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, J., and Cohen, P. (1975).Applied Multiple Regression: Correlation Analyses for the Behavioral Sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J.Google Scholar
  10. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.Psychometrika 16: 297–334.Google Scholar
  11. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis for distributive justice?J. Soc. Issues 31: 137–149.Google Scholar
  12. Deutsch, M. (1977). Recurrent themes in the study of social conflict.J. Soc. Issues 33: 222–225.Google Scholar
  13. Dittrich, J. E., and Carrell, M. R. (1976). Dimensions of organizational fairness as predictors of job satisfaction, absence, and turnover.Proc. Acad. Manag., 79–83.Google Scholar
  14. Dittrich, J. E., and Carrell, M. R. (1979). Organizational equity perceptions, employee job satisfaction, and departmental absence and turnover rates.Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf. 24: 29–40.Google Scholar
  15. Driscoll, J. W. (1978). Trust and participation in organizational decision making as predictors of satisfaction.Acad. Manag. J. 21: 44–56.Google Scholar
  16. Finn, R. H., and Lee, S. M. (1972). Salary equity: Its determinants, analysis, and correlates.J. Appl. Psychol. 56: 283–292.Google Scholar
  17. Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of “voice” and improvement on experienced inequity.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 35: 108–119.Google Scholar
  18. Folger, R., Rosenfield, D., Grove, J., and Corkran, L. (1979). Effects of “voice” and peer opinions on responses to inequity.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37: 2253–2261.Google Scholar
  19. French, J. R. P., Jr., Caplan, R. D., and Harrison, R. V. (1982).The Mechanisms of Job Stress and Strain, John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Goodman, P. S. (1974). An examination of referents used in the evaluation of pay.Org. Behav. Hum. Perf. 12: 170–195.Google Scholar
  21. Goodman, P. S., and Friedman, A. (1971). An examination of Adams' theory of inequity.Adm. Sci. Quart. 16: 271–288.Google Scholar
  22. Greenberg, J. (1982). Approaching equity and avoiding inequity in groups and organizations. In Greenberg, J., and Cohen, R. L. (eds.),Equity and Justice in Social Behavior, Academic Press, New York, pp. 389–435.Google Scholar
  23. Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations.J. Appl. Psychol. 71: 340–342.Google Scholar
  24. Greenberg, J., and Folger, R. (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In Paulus, P. B. (eds),Basic Group Processes Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 235–256.Google Scholar
  25. Homans, G. G. (1961).Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms Harcourt, Brace, New York.Google Scholar
  26. Landy, F. J., Barnes, J. L., and Murphy, K. R. (1978). Correlates of perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation.J. Appl. Psychol. 63: 751–754.Google Scholar
  27. Landy, F. J., Barnes-Farrell, J. & Cleveland, J. N. (1980). Perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation: A follow-up.J. Appl. Psychol. 65: 355–356.Google Scholar
  28. LaTour, S., Houlden, P., Walker, L., and Thibaut, J. W. (1976). Procedure: Transnational perspectives and preferences.Yale Law J. 86: 258–290.Google Scholar
  29. Lawler, E. E., III. (1968). Equity theory as a predictor of productivity and work quality.Psychol. Bull. 70: 596–610.Google Scholar
  30. Lawler, E. E., III. (1971).Pay and Organizational Effectiveness: A Psychological View. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  31. Lawler, E. E., III. (1977). Reward systems. In Hackman, J. R., and Suttle, J. L. (eds.),Improving life at work: Behavioral science approaches to organizational change Goodyear Publishing Co., Santa Monica, CA, pp. 163–226.Google Scholar
  32. Leventhal, G. S. (1976). Fairness in social relationships. In Thibaut, J., Spence, J. T., and Carson, R. T. (eds.),Contemporary Topics in Social Psychology General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ, pp. 211–239.Google Scholar
  33. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? In Gergen, K. J., Greenberg, M. S., and Willis, R. H. (eds.),Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research Plenum Press, New York, pp. 27–55.Google Scholar
  34. Lind, E. A., Kurtz, S., Musante, L., Walker, L., and Thibaut, J. W. (1980). Procedure and outcome effects on reactions to adjudicated resolution of conflicts of interest.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 39: 643–653.Google Scholar
  35. Lord, R. G., and Hohenfeld, J. A. (1979). Longitudinal assessment of equity effects on the performance of major league baseball players.J. Appl. Psychol. 64: 19–26.Google Scholar
  36. Oldham, G. R., and Miller, H. E. (1979). The effect of significant other's job complexity on employee reactions to work.Hum. Rel. 32: 247–260.Google Scholar
  37. O'Reilly, C. A., III. (1978). The intentional distortion of information in organizational communications: a laboratory and field investigation.Hum. Rel. 31: 173–193.Google Scholar
  38. O'Reilly, C. A., III, and Roberts, K. H. (1976). Credibility and communication in work units.J. Appl. Psychol. 61: 99–102.Google Scholar
  39. Pritchard, R. A. (1969). Equity theory: A review and critique.Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf. 4: 176–211.Google Scholar
  40. Quinn, R. (1977).Effectiveness in Work Roles: Employee Responses to Work Environments, Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
  41. Schwartzwald, J., and Goldenberg, J. (1979). Compliance and assistance to an authority figure in perceived equitable or nonequitable situations.Hum. Rel. 32: 877–888.Google Scholar
  42. Telly, C. S., French, W. L., and Scott, W. G. (1971). The relationship of inequity to turnover among hourly workers.Admin. Sci. Quart. 16: 164–172.Google Scholar
  43. Thibaut, J. W., and Kelley, H. H. (1959).The Social Psychology of Groups John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  44. Thibaut, J. W., and Walker, L. (1975).Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  45. Thibaut, J. W., and Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure.Calif. Law Rev. 66: 541–566.Google Scholar
  46. Tyler, T. R., and Caine, A. (1981). The role of distributional and procedural fairness in the endorsement of formal leaders.J. Person. Soc. Psychol. 41: 642–655.Google Scholar
  47. Walker, L., Lind, E. A., and Thibaut, J. W. (1979). The relation between procedural and distributive justice.Va. Law rev. 65: 1401–1420.Google Scholar
  48. Walster, E., Berscheid, E., and Walster, G. W. (1973). New directions in equity research.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 25: 151–176.Google Scholar
  49. Weick, K. E. (1966). The concept of equity in the perception of pay.Admin. Sci. Quart. 2: 414–439.Google Scholar
  50. Weick, K. E., and Nesset, B. (1968). Preferences among forms of equity.Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf. 3: 400–416.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sheldon Alexander
    • 2
  • Marian Ruderman
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Creative LeadershipGreensboro
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyWayne State UniversityDetroit

Personalised recommendations