Procedure and outcome effects on reactions to adjudicated resolution of conflicts of interest
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6200739 |
|---|---|
| Authors | A Lind (0000-0001-8625-8886), E Allan Lind, Et Al, Laurens Walker, et al et al, Susan Kurtz, Susan Turner Kurtz, Linda Musante, John W Thibaut, John Thibaut |
| Year | 1980 |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 643-653 |
| Publication date | 1980-10-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0022-3514 • E-ISSN: 1939-1315 |
| Publisher | American Psychological Association (APA) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1037//0022-3514.39.4.643 |
| OpenAlex | W4249423556 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 59 |
| References cited | 10 |
School of Law University of North CarolinaUniversity of VirginiaThe relationship between perceptions of distributive justice and perceptions ofprocedural justice was studied by examining the effects of outcome on reac-tions to an adjudication procedure and the effects of procedures on reactions toan adjudication outcome. Undergraduate subjects were led to believe they hadbeen charged with wrongdoing of which they knew they were innocent. Thecharge was tried, and the subjects' outcomes were determined, using procedures(adversary or nonadversary) found previously to be high or low in perceivedprocedural justice. Subjects were then told that they had been found innocentor guilty. Perceptions of the trial process were assessed either before or afterthe verdict was announced. After the verdict additional questionnaires assessedperceptions of the verdict and overall perceptions of procedural and distribu-tive fairness. The results showed that disputants saw the adversary procedureas fairer than the nonadversary and that they saw the verdict as more fair andsatisfying, and as more accurate and unbiased, when it followed an adversarytrial. Outcome did not affect overall perceptions of procedural justice, nor wasthere any tendency for knowledge of the verdict to alter the relative positionsof the two procedures on important dimensions of disputant perceptions
Conflict resolution · Outcome (game theory · Political science · Resolution (logic) · Deception detection and forensic psychology · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare · Psychology · Social Psychology
Protest Intentions on the Eve of South Africa's First Nonracial Elections
Exploring the "Lost and Found" of Justice Theory and Research
Psicologia Social da Justiça
An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions
Procedural Justice, Institutional Legitimacy, and the Acceptance of Unpopular U.S. Supreme Court Decisions
Voice, control, and procedural justice
Justice Theory and Research
Procedural Justice, Participation, and the Fair Process Effect in Groups and Organizations
Voice and Justification
Moral Virtues, Fairness Heuristics, Social Entities, and Other Denizens of Organizational Justice
Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions
Resistance to Affirmative Action
Evaluations of Affirmative Action Applicants
It’s All About the Money. Or Is It
Justice-restoring responses
The Importance of Conversation in Transitional Justice
The role of fairness in implementing large‐scale change
Fair and Effective Decision Making in Forest Management Planning
A Relational Model of Authority in Groups
Aversive Racism
The Psychology of Conflict and Conflict Management in Organizations
Influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders
Procedural justice and culture
Procedural preference as a function of conflict intensity
Understanding why the justice of group procedures matters
Psychological models of the justice motive
Do Fair Procedures Matter? The Effect of Procedural Justice on Spouse Assault
Justice is no simple matter
Some determinants of reactions to procedural models for conflict resolution
Collective restraint in social dilemmas
Procedural justice and participation in task selection
University students’ perceptions of a fair learning environment
Procedural Justice, Distributive Justice
A closer look at the relation between tax complexity and tax equity perceptions
International relocation of inpatriate managers
Identity Orientation, Voice, and Judgments of Procedural Justice During Late Adolescence
Procedural fairness and self‐esteem
Affirmative Action, Unintentional Racial Biases, and Intergroup Relations
Reactions of Beneficiaries to Preferential Treatment
The effects of control on perceived fairness of procedures and outcomes
Apparent impropriety and procedural fairness judgments
Procedural fairness and work group responses to performance evaluation systems
Referent Cognitions Theory
Dispute Resolution Outside of Courts
An Integrative Perspective on Social Justice
Understanding gender differences in distributive and procedural justice
Is outcome fairness used to make procedural fairness judgments when procedural information is inaccessible
Context effects on procedural justice
Frustration effects in procedural justice research
Perfect justice procedures
Procedural justice research
Justice and organizational punishment
The effects of procedural aspects and outcome salience on procedural fairness judgments
The fair process effect and procedural criteria in the resolution of disputes between intimate same-sex friends
Why Japanese citizens evaluate the new indirect tax as unfair
Interactional fairness judgments
The role of procedural and distributive justice in organizational behavior
Why procedural justice in organizations
Interpersonal relations
The Social Psychology of Groups
Inequity In Social Exchange
Procedural Justice as Fairness
Preference for modes of dispute resolution as a function of process and decision control
Reactions to Procedural Models for Adjudicative Conflict Resolution
New directions in equity research
Distributive and procedural justice
Determinations of participant and observer satisfaction with adversary and inquisitorial modes of adjudication
Towards an understanding of inequity
| Unique citing works | 58 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,37 |
| Citation span | 1983 - 2023 (41) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 53 |