This study focused on the relationship between voice and judgments of procedural justice in a sample of older adolescents and examined potential moderating and mediating influences of identity orientation (personal, social, and collective) and negative emotional response. Participants read 1 of 2 different family conflict scenarios (voice and no voice) asking them to imagine themselves in a disagreement with their parents over grades and financial support. In the voice condition, parents were described as making their decision after listening to the participant’s input. In the no voice condition, parents were described as making their decision without listening to the participant’s input. The adolescents then judged the fairness of the parental decisions and responded to questions concerning their identity orientation. Findings indicate that in addition to replicating the effect of voice in a novel context, the present investigation found moderating effects of personal identity orientation on procedural fairness judgments. Additionally, negative emotional response partially mediated the relationship between voice and global judgments of procedural fairness.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
American Psychological Association (2002). Ethical principles for psychologists and code of conduct. Am. Psychol. 57(12): 1060–1073.
Baron, R. M., and Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51: 1173–1182.
Barrett-Howard, E., and Tyler, T. R. (1986). Procedural justice as a criterion in allocation decisions. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50: 296–304.
Brockner, J., Heuer, L., Siegel, P. A., Wisenfeld, B., Martin, C., Grover, S., Reed, T., and Bjorgvinsson, S. (1998). The moderating effect of self-esteem in reaction to voice: Converging evidence from five studies. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 75: 394–407.
Cheek, J. M., and Tropp, L. R. (1994). The Aspects of Identity Questionnaire: History and Bibliography. Unpublished manuscript, Wellesley College, MA.
Clayton, S., and Opotow, S. (2003). Justice and identity: Changing perspectives on what is fair. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 7: 298–310.
Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle. Psychol. Issues, 1 (Monograph No. 1).
Folger, R., and Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Acad. Manage. J. 32: 115–130.
Fondacaro, M. R., and Heller, K. (1990). Attributional style in aggressive adolescent boys. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 18: 75–89.
Fondacaro, M. R., Dunkle, M. E., and Pathak, M. K. (1998). Procedural justice in resolving family disputes: A psychosocial analysis of individual and family functioning in late adolescence. J. Youth Adolesc. 27: 101–118.
Fondacaro, M. R., Jackson, S. L., and Luescher, J. (2002). Toward the assessment of procedural and distributive justice in resolving family disputes. Soc. Justice Res. 15: 341–371.
Jackson, S., and Fondacaro, M. (1999). Procedural justice in resolving family conflict: Implications for youth violence prevention. Law & Policy 21: 101–127.
James, W. (1890). The Principles of Psychology. Holt, Oxford.
Konovsky, M. A., and Cropanzano, R. (1991) The perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 76: 698–707.
Korsgaard, M. A., Sapienza, H. J., and Schweiger, D. M. (1980). Beaten before begun: The role of procedural justice in planning change. J. Manage. 28: 497–516.
Krehbiel, P. J., and Cropanzano, R. (2000). Procedural justice, outcome favorability, and emotion. Soc. Justice Res. 15(4): 339–360.
Leung, K., and Lind, E. A. (1986). Procedure and culture: Effects of culture, gender, and investigator status on procedural preferences. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50: 1134–1140.
Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In Gergen, K., Greenberg, M., and Willis, R. (eds.), Social Exchange. Plenum, New York, pp. 27–55.
Lind, A. E. (1980). Procedure and outcome effects on reactions to adjudicated resolution of conflicts of interest. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 39: 643–653.
Lind, E. A., and Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. Plenum, New York.
Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In Adelson, J. (ed.), Handbook of Adolescent Psychology. Wiley, New York, pp. 159–187.
Matteson, D. R. (1975). Adolescence Today: Sex Roles and the Search for Identity. Homewood, Dorsey, IL.
Meilman, P. W. (1977). Crisis and Commitment in Adolescence: A Developmental Study of Ego Identity Status. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina.
Mikula, G., Scherer, K. R., and Athenstaedt, U. (1998). The role of injustice in the elicitation of differential emotional reactions. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24: 769–783.
Murphy-Berman, V., Cross, R., and Fondacaro, M. (1999). Fairness and health care decisions making: Testing the group value model of procedural justice. Soc. Justice Res. 12: 117–129.
Poythress, N. G., Schumacher, J., and Wiener, R. (1993). Procedural justice judgments of alternative procedures for resolving medial malpractice claims. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 23: 1639–1658.
Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology’s view of human nature. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51: 515–530.
Skitka, L. J. (2002). Do the means always justify the ends, or do the ends sometimes justify the means? A value protection model of justice reasoning. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 28: 452–461.
Skitka, L. J. (2003). Of different minds: An accessible identity model of justice reasoning. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 7: 286–297.
Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Tyler, T. R. (1984). The role of perceived injustice in defendants’ evaluations of their courtroom experience. Law Soc. Rev. 18: 51–74.
Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice? Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures. Law Soc. Rev. 22: 103–135.
Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models of justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 67: 850–863.
Tyler, T. R., and Blader, S. L. (2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 7: 349–361.
Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., and Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social Justice in a Diverse Society. Westview Press, Oxford.
Tyler, T. R., and Caine, A. (1981). The influence of outcomes and procedures on satisfaction with formal leaders. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 41: 642–655.
Tyler, T. R., and Folger, R. (1980). Distributional and procedural aspects of satisfaction with citizen–police encounters. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1: 81–292.
Tyler, T. R., and Lind, E. A. (2001). Procedural Justice. In Sanders, J., and Hamilton, V. L. (eds.), Handbook of Justice Research in Law. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Mark R. Fondacaro is an Associate Professor of Psychology and Associate Director of the Levin College of Law Center on Children and Families at the University of Florida. He received his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from Indiana University and his J.D. from Columbia University School of Law. His major research interests are ecological jurisprudence and the conceptualization and assessment of procedural justice in legal and extra-legal contexts including the family and the juvenile justice and health care systems.
Eve M. Brank is an Assistant Professor of Criminology, Law & Society at the University of Florida. She received her Ph.D. in social psychology and her J.D. from the University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Her major research interests are parental responsibility laws and juvenile law issues.
Jennifer Stuart is a graduate student in counseling psychology at the University of Florida. Her major research interests are adolescent development and delinquency prevention.
Sara Villanueva-Abraham received her Ph.D. in developmental psychology from the University of Florida. Her major research interests are adolescent development and parent-child relationships.
Jennifer Luescher is a Forensic Psychology Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Massachusetts, Boston. She received her Ph.D. in counseling psychology from the University of Florida. Her major research interests are in the areas of procedural justice, risk assessment and risk management, and mental health and juvenile justice policy.
Penny S. McNatt is a Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of North Florida. She received her Ph.D. in social psychology from the University of Florida. Her major research interests are in the area of intergroup relations.
Appendices
Appendix A: Conflict scenario
The no-voice condition:
DIRECTIONS: Imagine that the conflict situation described below actually happened to you. Read the situation carefully, try to imagine yourself in the situation, and then use the items that follow to rate the conflict situation on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
You are a sophomore at UF. You and your parents have agreed that they will financially support you if you maintain a 3.0 GPA each semester. You have done so for your freshman year. However, for the first semester of your sophomore year, you begin to attend late-night keg parties, and your grades suffer. Your GPA drops to a 2.0. Your parents are willing to give you a second chance before they cut you off. For the second semester, you work harder and bring your GPA up to a 2.8. You are prepared to explain to your parents before they make their decision that you are taking harder classes, doing volunteer work, having roommate problems, and that a 2.8 is close to a 3.0. However, they make their decision about whether to continue supporting you financially without listening to your arguments.
The voice condition:
DIRECTIONS: Imagine that the conflict situation described below actually happened to you. Read the situation carefully, try to imagine yourself in the situation, and then use the items that follow to rate the conflict situation on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
You are a sophomore at UF. You and your parents have agreed that they will financially support you if you maintain a 3.0 GPA each semester. You have done so for your freshman year. However, for the first semester of your sophomore year, you begin to attend late-night keg parties, and your grades suffer. Your GPA drops to a 2.0. Your parents are willing to give you a second chance before they cut you off. For the second semester, you work harder and bring your GPA up to a 2.8. You are prepared to explain to your parents before they make their decision that you are taking harder classes, doing volunteer work, having roommate problems, and that a 2.8 is close to a 3.0. They make their decision about whether to continue supporting you financially after listening to your arguments.
Appendix B: Questions from the family decision making questionnaire
Voice Subscale
1. Your parent(s) asked for your input before a decision was made.
18. Your parent(s) gave you an opportunity to express your side.
24. Your parent(s) carefully considered your views.
36. When your parent(s) made their decision, they gave little consideration to what you said.
57. You had a chance to discuss how you were being evaluated.
64. You felt as if your parent(s) listened to you.
Global Procedural Fairness
8. Looking back, the methods or procedures used to handle this situation were fair.
38. The rules or procedures followed were fair.
53. The methods, rules, or procedures followed in handling this situation were fair.
56. The approach or methods followed in handling this situation were very effective in making certain that everyone was treated fairly.
61. Overall, you were treated fairly.
67. Overall, your parent(s) tried to handle the situation fairly.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fondacaro, M.R., Brank, E.M., Stuart, J. et al. Identity Orientation, Voice, and Judgments of Procedural Justice During Late Adolescence. J Youth Adolescence 35, 987–997 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-006-9035-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-006-9035-8