Comparing Direct and Indirect Measures of Just Rewards

What Have We Learned

Datos Bibliográficos

ID5452902
AutoresB Markovsky (0000-0001-7925-4297, University of South Carolina), Kimmo Eriksson (0000-0002-7164-0924, Mälardalen University, Stockholm, Sweden, and Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden)
Año2012
Volumen41
Número1
Páginas240-245
Fecha de publicación2012-02-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaSociological Methods & Research (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0049-1241 • E-ISSN: 1552-8294
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0049124112448361
OpenAlexW2085869855
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas3
Referencias citadas2

We offer the first comparison between 'direct' and 'indirect' methods for measuring perceptions of distributive justice in reward allocations. The direct method simply asks respondents what they would consider to be a fair salary for a particular person in a given set of circumstances. In contrast, the indirect method infers fair salaries from respondents' judgments about the relative unfairness of hypothetical salaries. The particular indirect method that we will assess is a vignette survey technique pioneered by Jasso and Rossi (1977) and used in a number of more recent publications. The vignettes describe characteristics of a hypothetical employee, with the objective of deriving what respondents believe to be the just reward for that employee. Our experimental test suggests that the two methods yield incompatible results and that neither is immune to bias. The indirect method also suffers from a type of specification error that leads to untenable results. We conclude by suggesting directions for new research to gain a better understanding of these problems and, ultimately, to circumvent them

Econometrics · Economics · Statistics · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Mathematics · Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction · Psychology · Social Psychology