Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Egocentric Perceptions of Relationships, Competence, and Trustworthiness in Salary Allocation Choices

  • Published:
Social Justice Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents three experiments that investigate the effects of interpersonal perceptions on simulated monetary and salary allocations. Experiment 1 examined the effects of relationships on choices between interdependent monetary distributions for a sample of students. Experiment 2 examined the effects of relationships and competence on choices between interdependent salary allocations and on discretionary salary allocations in scenarios presented to a sample of working managers. Experiment 3 used a novel measurement of the social motives revealed by interdependent salary allocations and added a manipulation of trustworthiness for a sample of experienced MBA students. Egocentrism and judgments of incompetence or untrustworthiness had strong effects on participants' choices. Allocations also increased for liked others, even though allocators denied any effects for liking.

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

REFERENCES

  • Adam, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol.. 67: 422-436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adam, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange.In: Berkowitz, L. (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. (Vol. 2), Academic Press, New York, pp. 422-436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartol, K. M. and Martin, D. C. (1988). Influence on managerial pay allocation: A dependacy perspective. Pers. Psychol. 41: 361-378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, M. H., Blount, S., Loewenstein, G. (1995). Perceptions of fairness in interpersonal and individual choice situations. Psychol. Sci. 4: 39-43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, M., Loewenstein, G., and White, S. (1992). Reversals of preference in allocation decisions: Judging an alternative versus choosing among alternatives. Adm. Sci. Q. 37: 220-240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, M. H., Schroth, H. A., Pradhan Shah, P., Diekmann, K. A., and Tenbrunsel, A. E. (1994). The inconsistent role of comparison others and procedural justice in reactions to hypothetical job descriptions: Implications for job acceptance decisions. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 60: 326-352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettenhausen, K., and Murnighan, J. K. (1991). Developing and challenging a group norm: Interpersonal cooperation and structural competition. Adm. Sci. Q. 36: 20-35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. (1987). The predicament of injustice: The management of moral outrage. In: Staw, B., and Cummings, L. (eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol 9), JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 289-319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R., and Tripp, T. (1996). Beyond distrust: “Getting even” and the need for revenge. In: Tyler, T., and Kramer, R. (eds.), Trust in Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D. (1971). The Attraction Paradigm, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, R. (2000). Does perception of pay equity, pay satisfaction, and job satisfaction mediate the effect of positive affectivity on work motivation? Soc. Behav. Pers. 28: 177-184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deshpande, S. P., and Joseph, J. (1994). Variation in compensation decisions by managers: An empirical investigation. J. Psychol. 128: 41-50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice. J Soc. Issues 31: 137-149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, R. (1989). Judgment of coincidence: Mine versus yours. Am. J. Psychol. 102: 477-493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenigstein, A. (1984). Self-consciousness and the overperception of self as a target. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 47: 860-870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilovich, T., Medvec, V., and Savitsky, K. (2000). The spotlight effect in social judgment: An egocentric bias in estimates of the salience of one's own actions and appearance. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78: 211-222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heneman, R. L. (1990). Merit pay research. In: Ferris, G. R., and Rowland, K. M. (eds.), Personnel and Human Resources Management, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 321-364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huseman, R. C., Hatfield, J. D., and Miles, E. W. (1987). A new perspective on equity theory: The equity sensitivity construct. Acad. Manage. Rev. 12: 222-234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kernis, M. H., and Grannemann, B. D. (1986). Secondary control processes: A link with the egocentric bias? Represent. Res. Soc. Psychol. 16: 14-23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, J., and Clement, R. W. (1994). The truly false consensus effect: An ineradicable and egocentric bias in social perception. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 67: 596-610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, J., and Stanke, D. (2001). The role of self-referent and other-referent knowledge in perceptions of group characteristics. Person. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 27: 878-888.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, J. A., Sledge, P., and Mahler, H. I. (1986). Self-confirmatory attribution, egocentrism, and the perpetuation of self-beliefs. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50: 587-594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E. (1990). Strategic Pay, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, P. J., and Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Acad. Manage. Rev. 23: 438-512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebrand, W. B. G., Messick, D. M., and Wolters, F. (1986). Why we are fairer than others: A cross-cultural replication and extension. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 22: 590-604.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebrand, W. B. G., and Van Rijn, G. J. (1985). The effects of social motives on behavior in social dilemmas in two cultures. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 21: 86-102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A. (1986). Generalizing from Laboratory to Field Settings, Lexington Books, Lexington MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G. F., Bazerman, M. H., and Thompson, L. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 57: 426-441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lydon, J. E., Jamieson, D. W., and Zanna, M. P. (1988). Interpersonal similarity and the social and intellectual dimensions of first impressions. Soc. Cogn. 6: 269-286.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCrimmon, K., and Messick, D. (1976). A framework for social motives. Behav. Sci. 2: 86-100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., and Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Manage. Rev. 20: 709-734.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClintock, C. (1972). Social motivation—A set of propositions. Behav. Sci. 17: 438-454.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLean Parks, J., Boles, T. L., Conlon, D. J., DeSouza, E., Gatewood, W., Gibson, K. L., et al. (1996). Distributing adventitious outcomes: Social norms, egocentric martyrs, and the effects on future relationships. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 67: 181-200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, D. M., and Schell, T. (1992). Evidence for an equality heuristic in social decision making. Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 80: 311-323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, D. M., and Sentis, K. P. (1979). Fairness and preference. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 15: 418-434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, E. W., Hatfield, J. D., and Huseman, R. C. (1989). The Equity Sensitivity construct: Potential implications for worker performance. J. Manage. 15: 581-588.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, E. W., Hatfield, J. D., and Huseman, R. C. (1994). Equity sensitivity and outcome importance. J. Organ. Behav. 15: 585-596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, W., and Sawyer, J. (1967). Bargaining, expectations, and the preference for equality over equity. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 6: 139-149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, C. W., and Wynn, T. (2000). The degree to which justice is valued in the workplace. Soc. Justice Res. 13: 1-24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, C., Peterson, J., and McDonald, N. (1975). Factors affecting reward allocation by preschool children. Child Dev. 46: 942-947.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pillutla, M. M., and Murnighan, J. K. (1995). Being fair or appearing fair: Strategic behavior in ultimatum bargaining. Acad. Manage. J. 38: 1408-1426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polzer, J. T., Neale, M. A., and Glenn, P. O. (1993). The effects of relationships and justifications in an interdependent allocation task. Group Dec. Neg. 2: 135-148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Racicot, B., Doverspike, D., Hornsby, J., and Hauenstein, N. (1996). Job grade and labor market information effects on simulated compensation decisions. Public Pers. Manage. 25: 343-355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steil, J. M., and Makowski, D. G. (1989). Equity, equality, and need: A study of the patterns and outcomes associated with their use in intimate relationships. Soc. Justice Res. 3: 121-137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Syroit, J., and Poppe, M. (2000). Equity: Effects of input and output orientation on taking, giving, and dividing money. Soc. Justice Res. 13: 41-54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, K. (1993). Egocentric bias in perceived fairness: Is it observed in Japan? Soc. Justice Res. 6: 273-285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, K. (1999). Judgments of fairness by just world believers. J. Soc. Psychol. 139: 631-638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T., and Lind, E. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E., Walster, G. W., and Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and Research, Allyn & Bacon, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wayne, S. J., Liden, R. C., Graf, I. K., and Ferris, G. R. (1997). The role of upward influence tactics in human resource decisions. Pers. Psychol. 50: 979-1006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1993). Calculativeness, trust and economic organization. J. Law Econ. 36: 453-486.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. J.L. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    John M. Oesch

  2. Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois

    J. Keith Murnighan

Authors
  1. John M. Oesch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Keith Murnighan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Keith Murnighan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Oesch, J.M., Murnighan, J.K. Egocentric Perceptions of Relationships, Competence, and Trustworthiness in Salary Allocation Choices. Social Justice Research 16, 53–78 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022926111093

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022926111093

Search

Navigation