Advertisement

A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Procedural Justice and Distributive Justice: Implications for Justice Research

  • Neil M. A. Hauenstein
  • Tim McGonigle
  • Sharon W. Flinder
Article

Abstract

Although there are many studies that utilize the constructs of procedural and distributive justice, this research tends to ignore the implications of the bivariate relationship between the two constructs. The stronger the relationship between the two constructs, the more problematic ignoring this relationship becomes. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the relationship between procedural and distributive justice. We also conducted an initial assessment of extent to which the relationship between procedural and distributive justice was context sensitive. Finally, a series of methodological moderators was evaluated. Results indicated that the relationship between procedural and distributive justice is strong (ρ= .64) across all studies. However, this relationship was moderated by research context, and even within research context, there was substantial evidence of variability. The results of the meta-analysis were discussed in terms of implications for theory, research methods, and construct measurement in justice research.

procedural justice distributive justice fairness measuring justice 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Aquino, K. (1995). Relationships among pay inequity, perceptions of procedural justice and organizational citizenship. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 8, 21–31.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, G. A., Trevino, L. K., & Sims, H. P. (1993). Justice and organizational punishment: Attitudinal outcomes of disciplinary events. Social Justice Research, 6, 39–67.Google Scholar
  3. Bennett, R. J. (1991). Taking the Sting Out of the Whip: The Effects of the Magnitude of the Punishment and of the Consistency of its Allocation on Attitudes, Retaliation and the Future Inclination to Behave Unethically. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.Google Scholar
  4. Bies, R. J., Martin, C. L., & Brockner, J. (1993). Just laid off, but still a “good citizen?” Only if the process is fair. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 6, 227–238.Google Scholar
  5. Bobocel, D. R., Agar, S. E., Meyer, J. P., & Irving, P. G. (1996, April). Managerial accounts and fairness perceptions in third-party conflict resolution: Differentiating the effects of shifting responsibility and providing a justification. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  6. Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: The interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 189–208.Google Scholar
  7. Bruning, N. S., Keup, L., & Cooper, C. L. (1996, April). Justice perceptions and outcomes in a restructured organization: A longitudinal study. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  8. Chapdelaine, A. (1993). Procedural Justice, Distributive Justice and Overall Satisfaction in Interpersonal Relationships. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.Google Scholar
  9. Clemmer, E. C. (1988). The Role of Fairness in Customer Satisfaction With Services. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.Google Scholar
  10. Colquitt, J. A., & Chertoff, J. M. (1996, April). Explaining injustice: The interactive effects of explanation and outcome on fairness perceptions and task motivation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  11. Conlon, D. F. (1993). Some tests of the self-interest and group-value models of procedural justice: Evidence from an organizational appeal procedure. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1109–1124.Google Scholar
  12. Conlon, D. F., & Fasolo, P. M. (1990). Influence of speed of third-party intervention and outcome on negotiator and constituent fairness judgments. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 833–846.Google Scholar
  13. Conlon, D. E., & Ross, W. H. (1993). The effects of partisan third parties on negotiator behavior and outcome perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 280–290.Google Scholar
  14. Crant, M. J., & Bateman, T. S. (1989). A model of employee responses to drug-testing programs. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 173–190.Google Scholar
  15. Cropanzano, R., & Ambrose, M. L. (2001). Procedural and distributive justice are more similar than you think. In Greenberg, J., & Cropanzano, R. (Eds.), Advances in Organizational Justice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Cropanzano, R., Byrne, Z. S., Bobocel, D. R., & Rupp, D. E. (2001). Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social entities, and other denizens of organizational justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 164–209.Google Scholar
  17. Cropanzano, R., & Greenberg, J. (1997). Progress in organizational justice: Tunneling through the maze. In Cooper, C. L., & Robertson, I. T. (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 12. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. Cropanzano, R., & Prehar, C. A. (1999). Using social exchance theory to distinguish procedural from interactional justice. Paper presented at the 14th Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta.Google Scholar
  19. Crosby, F. (1976). A model of egoistic relative deprivation. Psychological Review, 83, 85–113.Google Scholar
  20. Dailey, R. C., & Kirk, D. J. (1992). Distributive and procedural justice as antecedents of job dissatisfaction and intent to turnover. Human Relations, 45, 305–317.Google Scholar
  21. Daly, J. P., & Geyer, P. D. (1994). The role of fairness in implementing large-scale change: Employee evaluations of process and outcome in seven facility relocations. Journal of Business, 15, 623–638.Google Scholar
  22. Davis, E. (1992). The Effects of Managed Health Care Systems on Employee Benefit Selection, Affective and Behavioral Outcomes. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.Google Scholar
  23. Dougherty, R. H. (1990). Perceptions of Procedural and Distributive Justice in Relation to Organizational and Functional Role. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston University. Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  24. Flinder, S.W. (1994). Distributive and Procedural Justice: Effects of Outcomes, Inputs and Procedures. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.Google Scholar
  25. Flinder, S. W., & Hauenstein, N. M. A. (1996, April). Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  26. Folger, R. (1986a). A referent cognitions theory of relative deprivation. In Olson, J. M., Herman, C. P., & Zanna, M. P. (Eds.), Social Comparison and Relative Deprivation: The Ontario Symposium, Vol. 4, 3–55. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  27. Folger, R. (1986b). Rethinking equity theory: A referent cognitions model. In Bierhoff, H. W., Cohen, R. L., & Greenberg, J. (Eds.), Justice in Social Relations, 145–162. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  28. Folger, R., & Bies, R. J. (1989). Managerial responsibilities and procedural justice. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 79–90.Google Scholar
  29. Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 115–130.Google Scholar
  30. Folger, R., & Martin, C. (1986). Relative deprivation and referent cognitions: Distributive and procedural justice effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 531–546.Google Scholar
  31. Fryxell, G. F., & Gordon, M. F. (1989). Workplace justice and job satisfaction as predictors of satisfaction with union and management. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 851–866.Google Scholar
  32. Gilliland, S. W. (1992). The Perceived Fairness of Selection Systems: An Organizational Justice Perspective. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.Google Scholar
  33. Gilliland, S.W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems:Anorganizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 18, 694–734.Google Scholar
  34. Gilliland, S. W. (1994). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to a selection system. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 691–701.Google Scholar
  35. Gilliland, S. W., & Beckstein, B. A. (1996). Procedural and distributive justice in the editorial review process. Personnel Psychology, 49, 669–691.Google Scholar
  36. Gilliland, S.W., & Honig, H. (1994). Development of the selection fairness survey. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Nashville, TN.Google Scholar
  37. Gilliland, S. W., & Troth, M. A. (1996). Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Selection System Justice. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  38. Gordon, M. F., & Bowlby, R. I. (1988). Propositions about grievance settlements: Finally, consultation with grievants. Personnel Psychology, 41, 107–123.Google Scholar
  39. Gordon, M. E., & Fryxell, G. E. (1989). Voluntariness of association as a moderator of the importance of procedural and distributive justice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 993–1009.Google Scholar
  40. Greenberg, J. (1986). Differential intolerance for inequity from organizational and individual agents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 16, 191–196.Google Scholar
  41. Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12, 9–22.Google Scholar
  42. Greenberg, J. (1988). The distributive justice of organizational performance evaluations. In Bierhoff, H.W., Cohen, R. L., & Greenberg, J. (Eds.), Justice in Social Relations, 337–351. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  43. Greenberg, J. (1989). Cognitive reevaluation of outcomes in response to underpayment inequity. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 174–184.Google Scholar
  44. Greenberg, J. (1990a). Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequity: The hidden cost of pay cuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 561–568.Google Scholar
  45. Greenberg, J. (1990b). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16, 399–432.Google Scholar
  46. Greenberg, J. (1993a). Stealing in the name of justice: Informational and interpersonal moderators of theft reactions to underpayment equity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 81–103.Google Scholar
  47. Greenberg, J. (1993b). Justice and organizational citizenship: A commentary on the state of the scence. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 6, 249–256.Google Scholar
  48. Greenberg, J. (1993c). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In Cropanzano, R. (Ed.), Justice in the Workplace: Approaching Fairness in Human Resource Management. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  49. Greenberg, J. (1994). Using socially fair treatment to promote acceptance of a work site smoking ban. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 288–297.Google Scholar
  50. Greenberg, J. (1996). The Quest for Justice on the Job: Essays and Experiments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  51. Greenberg, J. (2001). The seven loose can(n)ons of organizational justice. In Greenberg, J., & Cropanzano, R. (Eds.), Advances in Organizational Justice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Hattrup, K. E. (1992). Affirmative Action in Organizational Hiring: Self-Regulation and Fairness Processes in Beneficiary Reactions. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.Google Scholar
  53. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of Meta-Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  54. Jones, F. F. (1991). The Influence of Distributive Justice, Procedural Justice and Employee Knowledge of the Compensation System on Compensation System Acceptance, Turnover Intentions and Job Performance. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.Google Scholar
  55. Jordan, K. P. (1993). Perceptions of Procedural Fairness as a Function of the Freedom to Voice and the Position Power of the Target. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.Google Scholar
  56. Joy, V. L., & Witt, I. A. (1992). Delay of gratification as a moderator of the procedural justice-distributive justice relationship. Group and Organization Management, 17, 297–308.Google Scholar
  57. Karambayya, R., & Brett, J. M. (1989). Managers handling disputes: Third-party roles and perceptions of fairness. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 687–704.Google Scholar
  58. Karambayya, R., Brett, J. M., & Lytle, A. (1992). Effects of formal authority and experience on third-party roles, outcomes, and perceptions of fairness. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 426–438.Google Scholar
  59. Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. A. (1993). Procedural justice, attitudes and subsidiary top management compliance with multinationals' corporate strategic decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 502–526.Google Scholar
  60. Konovsky, M. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1991). The perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 689–707.Google Scholar
  61. Konovsky, M. A., & Folger, R. (1991). The effects of procedures, social accounts and benefits level on victim's layoff reactions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 630–650.Google Scholar
  62. Konovsky, M. A., Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1987). Relative effects of procedural and distributive justice on employee attitudes. Special Issue: Procedural justice. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 17, 15–24.Google Scholar
  63. Koper, G., & Vermunt, R. (1988). The effects of procedural aspects and outcome salience on procedural fairness judgments. Social Justice Research, 2, 289–301.Google Scholar
  64. Kumar, N., Scheer, L. K., & Steenkamp, J. B. F. M. (1995). The effects of supplier fairness on vulnerable resellers. Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 54–65.Google Scholar
  65. Lee, C., & Farh, J. L. (1996, April). The effects of gender in organizational justice perception. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  66. 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., & Willis, R. (Eds.), Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  67. Lind, E. A. (2001). Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations. In Greenberg, J., & Cropanzano, R. (Eds.), Advances in Organizational Justice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Lind, E. A., Erickson, B. E., Friedland, N., & Dickenberger, M. (1978). Reactions to procedural models for adjudicative conflict resolution: A cross-national study. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 22, 318–341.Google Scholar
  69. Lissak, R. I. (1983). Procedural Fairness: How Employees Evaluate Procedures. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL.Google Scholar
  70. Lowe, R. H., & Vodanovich, S. H. (1995). A field study of distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of Business and Psychology, 10, 99–114.Google Scholar
  71. Macan, T. H., Avedon, M. J., Paese, M., & Smith, D. E. (1994). The effects of applicants' reactions to cognitive ability tests and an assessment center. Personnel Psychology, 47, 715–738.Google Scholar
  72. Martin, C. L. (1987). Distributive and Procedural Justice: Effects on Satisfaction and Commitment. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  73. McEnrue, M. P. (1989). The perceived fairness of managerial promotion practices. Human Relations, 42, 815–827.Google Scholar
  74. McFarlin; D. B., & Sweeney, P. D. (1992). Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 3, 626–637.Google Scholar
  75. Minton, J. W. (1988). Justice, Satisfaction and Loyalty: Employee Withdrawal and Voice in the Din of Inequity. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Duke University, Durham, NC.Google Scholar
  76. Moorman, R. H. (1990). The Role of Cognition and Disposition as Predictors of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Study of Personality and Perceived Fairness. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.Google Scholar
  77. 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.Google Scholar
  78. Niehoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behaviors. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 527–556.Google Scholar
  79. Orpen, C. (1994). The effect of organizational commitment on the relationship between procedural and distributive justice. Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 135–136.Google Scholar
  80. Otto, C. A. (1993). The Relationship Between Transformational Leadership and Employee Loyalty, Employee Commitment and Employee Perceptions of Organizational Justice. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.Google Scholar
  81. Poythress, N. G., Schumacher, J., Wiener, R., & Murrin, M. (1993). Procedural justice judgments of alternative procedures for resolving medical malpractice claims. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1639–1658.Google Scholar
  82. Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1986). Handbook of Organizational Measurement. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
  83. Rahman, M. (1992). The Effect of a Constrained Resource on Individual Performance, Performance Effort and Feelings Toward the Task and Decision-Makers: The Intervention of Equity. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL.Google Scholar
  84. Rasinski, K. A. (1987a). Outcomes, Fairness and Values as Predictors of Political Responses of Government Allocation Policies: A Field Study. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.Google Scholar
  85. Rasinski, K. A. (1987b). What's fair is fair—or is it? Value differences underlying public views about social justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 201–211.Google Scholar
  86. Rasinski, K. A. (1988). Economic justice, political behavior and American political values. Social Justice Research, 2, 61–79.Google Scholar
  87. Ratcliff, S. L. (1991). An Examination of Workplace Justice, Attitudes and Behavior: The Case of Layoffs. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.Google Scholar
  88. Scarlicki, D. P., & Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 434–443.Google Scholar
  89. Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219–247.Google Scholar
  90. Sheppard, B. H., & Lewicki, R. J. (1987).Toward general principles of managerial fairness. Social Justice Research, 1,161–176.Google Scholar
  91. Smither, J.W., Reilly, R. R., Millsap, R. F., Perlman, K., & Stoffey, R.W. (1993). Applicant reactions to selection procedures. Personnel Psychology, 46, 49–76.Google Scholar
  92. Suh, Y. (1992). Instrumental and Noninstrumental Voice Effects on Perceptions of Procedural Justice in a Performance Appraisal. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Nebraska, Omaha, NE.Google Scholar
  93. Sweeney, P. D., & McFarlin, D. B. (1997). Process and outcome: Gender differences in the assessment of justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 83–98.Google Scholar
  94. Sweeney, P. D., & McFarlin, D. B. (1993). Workers' evaluations of the ends and the means: An examination of four models of distributive and procedural justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55, 23–40.Google Scholar
  95. Tepper, B. J., & Braun, C. K. (1995). Does the experience of organizational justice mitigate the invasion of privacy engendered by random drug testing? An empirical investigation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 16, 211–225.Google Scholar
  96. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  97. Tyler, T. R. (1984). The role of perceived injustice in defendants' evaluations of their courtroom experience. Law and Society Review, 18, 51–74.Google Scholar
  98. Tyler, T. R. (1987). Conditions leading to value-expressive effects in judgments of procedural justice: A test of four models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 333–344.Google Scholar
  99. Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice? Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of legal procedures. Law and Society Review, 22, 103–135.Google Scholar
  100. Tyler, T. R. (1991). Using procedures to justify outcomes: Testing the viability of a procedural justice strategy for managing conflict and allocating resources in work organizations. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 259–279.Google Scholar
  101. Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 850–863.Google Scholar
  102. Tyler, T. R., & Caine, A. (1981). The role of distributive and procedural fairness in the endorsement of formal leaders. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 643–665.Google Scholar
  103. Tyler, T. R., & Folger, R. (1980). Distributional and procedural aspects of satisfaction with citizen-police encounters. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1, 281–292.Google Scholar
  104. Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K., & McGraw, K. (1985). The influence of perceived injustice on the endorsement of political leaders. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 700–725.Google Scholar
  105. Van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1997). Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 95–104.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Neil M. A. Hauenstein
    • 1
  • Tim McGonigle
    • 2
  • Sharon W. Flinder
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyVirginia TechBlacksburg
  2. 2.Caliber AssociatesFairfax
  3. 3.The Performance CenterArlington

Personalised recommendations