Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Overall Organizational Justice Perceptions Within the Four-Dimensional Framework

  • Published:
Social Justice Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Given the recent interest in a global model of organizational justice, the purpose of the present paper is to examine the role of overall justice within Colquitt’s (J Appl Psychol 86:386–400, 2001) four-dimensional framework. In two studies (using a student and professional sample), confirmatory factor analysis results supported a five-factor model of justice. Analyses demonstrated that overall justice is likely an independent construct, can be predicted from the facet measures of justice, and is not a second-order hierarchical construct. In both studies, structural equation modeling indicated that overall justice partially mediated the relationship between the four dimensions of justice and both global and specific outcomes examined by Colquitt (2001) and Ambrose and Schminke (J Appl Psychol 94:491–500, 2009), respectively. Taken together, this research demonstrates that there is a need for both overall justice and the four justice dimensions in comprehensive models of organizational justice. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for this point.

  2. For more expansive reviews, see Greenberg (2011) or Colquitt, Greenberg, & Zapata-Phelan (2005).

  3. We would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for this point.

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422–426. doi:10.1037/h0040968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1–18. doi:10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Arnaud, A. (2005). Are procedural justice and distributive justice conceptually distinct? In J. Greenberg & J. A Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 60–84). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 491–500. doi:10.1037/a0013203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K. (1995). Relationships among pay inequity, perceptions of procedural rights, and organizational citizenship. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 8, 21–33. doi:10.1037/1076-8998.6.4.332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beugre, C. D., & Baron, R. A. (2001). Perceptions of systematic justice: The effects of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 324–339. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb00199.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lweicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43–45). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., Wayne, J. H., & Grzywacz, J. G. (2006). Measuring the positive side of the work–family interface: Development and validation of a work–family enrichment scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 131–164. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2005.02.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 278–321. doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2958.

  • Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386–400. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.386.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 425–445. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Greenberg, J., & Scott, B. A. (2005). Organizational justice: Where do we stand? In J. Greenberg & J. A. Colquitt (Eds.), The handbook of organizational justice (pp. 589–619). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J., Greenberg, J., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2005). What is organizational justice? A historical overview. In J. Greenberg & J. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 3–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Shaw, J. C. (2005). How should organizational justice be measured? In J. Greenberg & J. A. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassina, N. E., Jones, D. A., & Uggerslev, K. L. (2008). Meta-analytic tests of relationships between organizational justice and citizenship behavior: Testing agent system and shared variance models. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 805–828. doi:10.1002/job.494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. New York: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, C. D., & Locke, E. A. (1992). The new look in job satisfaction research and theory, in job satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs and how it affects their performance. In C. J. Cranny, P. C. Smith, & E. F. Stone (Eds.), Job satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs and how it affects performance (pp. 165–194). New York: Maxwell Macmillan.

  • Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (2001). Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (Vol. 1, pp. 1–55). New York: Information Age Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., & Greenberg, J. (1985). Procedural justice: An interpretive analysis of personnel systems. In K. M. Rowland & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 3, pp. 141–183). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilliland, S. W. (2008). Peeling the justice onion: Ten essential questions. In S. W. Gilliland, D. P. Skarlicki, & D. D. Steiner (Eds.), Justice, morality, and social responsibility (pp. 291–311). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12, 9–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Greenberg, J. (2001). Setting the justice agenda: Seven unanswered questions about “what, why, and how.” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 210–219. doi:10.1006/jvbe.2001.1792.

  • Greenberg, J. (2011). Organizational justice: The dynamics of fairness in the workplace. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 271–327). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauenstein, N. M., McGonigle, T., & Flinder, S. W. (2001). A meta-analysis of the relationship between procedural justice and distributive justice: Implications for justice research. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 13, 39–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holtz, B. C., & Harold, C. M. (2009). Fair today, fair tomorrow? A longitudinal investigation of overall justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1185–1189. doi:10.1037/a0015900.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. A., & Martens, M. L. (2009). The mediating role of overall fairness and the moderating role of trust certainty in justice–criteria relationships: The formation and use of fairness heuristics in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 1025–1051. doi:10.1002/jobs.577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, T. Y., & Leung, K. (2007). Forming and reacting to overall fairness: A cross-cultural comparison. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 83–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 (Vol. 9, pp. 91–131). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.), Social exchanges: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27–55). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 56–88). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302–318. doi:10.1177/0146167292183006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masuda, A. D., McNall, L. A., Allen, T. D., & Nicklin, J. M. (2012). Examining the constructs of work-to-family enrichment and positive spillover. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 197–210. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2011.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 845–855. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.76.6.845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, L., & Allen, T. D. (2001). Work/family benefits: Variables related to employees’ fairness perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 453–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roznowski, M., & Hulin, C. (1992). The scientific merit of valid measures of general constructs with special reference to job satisfaction and job withdrawal. In C. J. Cranny, P. C. Smith, & E. F. Stone (Eds.), Job satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs and how it affects their performance (pp. 123–163). NewYork: Lexington Books.

  • Shapiro, D. L. (2001). The death of justice theory is likely if theories neglect the wheels: Already invented and the voices of the injustice victims. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 235–242. doi:10.1006/jvbe.2001.1795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1006/obhd.1994.1041.

  • Skarlicki, D. P., & Latham, G. P. (1997). Leadership training in organizational justice to increase citizenship behavior within a labor union: A replication. Personnel Psychology, 50, 617–633. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00707.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Assessing the information to which people are reacting has a pivotal role in understanding organizational justice. In S. W. Gilliland, D. D. Steiner, & D. E Skarlicki (Eds.), Theoretical and cultural perspectives on organizational justice (pp. 63–84). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Hartford, West Hartford, CT, 06117, USA

    Jessica M. Nicklin

  2. College at Brockport, State University of New York (SUNY), Brockport, NY, USA

    Laurel A. McNall

  3. The Group for Organizational Effectiveness, Inc. (gOE), Albany, NY, USA

    Christopher P. Cerasoli

  4. University of Albany, State University of New York (SUNY), Albany, NY, USA

    Sarah R. Strahan & Jennifer A. Cavanaugh

Authors
  1. Jessica M. Nicklin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laurel A. McNall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christopher P. Cerasoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sarah R. Strahan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jennifer A. Cavanaugh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jessica M. Nicklin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nicklin, J.M., McNall, L.A., Cerasoli, C.P. et al. The Role of Overall Organizational Justice Perceptions Within the Four-Dimensional Framework. Soc Just Res 27, 243–270 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-014-0208-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-014-0208-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation