Elaborating Procedural Fairness: Justice Becomes Both Simpler and more Complex
Past research has indicated the importance of disputant voice in determining the fairness of conflict resolution procedures, but some conflicting data have called the role of voice into question. The authors review the role of voice in procedural fairness and conclude that some of those negative res...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Personality & social psychology bulletin 1996-05, Vol.22 (5), p.435-441 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 441 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 435 |
| container_title | Personality & social psychology bulletin |
| container_volume | 22 |
| creator | Folger, Robert Cropanzano, Russell Timmerman, Thomas A. Howes, John C. Mitchell, David |
| description | Past research has indicated the importance of disputant voice in determining the fairness of conflict resolution procedures, but some conflicting data have called the role of voice into question. The authors review the role of voice in procedural fairness and conclude that some of those negative results were due to a confounded research design. In three studies, this problem was corrected, and additional data were collected. Contrary to the earlier findings, results show that when other factors are equated, participants prefer the conflict resolution procedures that offer the most voice. The authors further note, however, that factors such as the role of the decision maker are also important in determining fairness. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0146167296225001 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_57458318</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0146167296225001</sage_id><sourcerecordid>9666238</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-b50d9f78f2ee475fc7ee0f17834781dfcb598c0654d89d71629b28f78d2bd46c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1Lw0AUxBdRsFbvHhcFb9H93o03W1o_KCqo57DZvNSUJFt3E9D_3pR6kEJPD2Z-MzwYhM4puaZU6xtChaJKs1QxJgmhB2hEpWSJFpwfotHGTjb-MTqJcUUIEUqwEXqe1Tb3wXZVu8SvwTso-mBrPLdVaCHGW_zUx65ygCfgfAMRT3z3id-qZl1DwLYtcOMD4KnfCN-n6Ki0dYSzvztGH_PZ-_QhWbzcP07vFonjSnZJLkmRltqUDEBoWToNQEqqDRfa0KJ0uUyNI0qKwqSFpoqlOTNDoGB5IZTjY3S17V0H_9VD7LKmig7q2rbg-5hJLaTh1AzgxQ648n1oh98yRnmapkSTAbrcB1HFBVGGCjFQZEu54GMMUGbrUDU2_GSUZJsNst0NhkiyjUS7hH-l-_hfE4KEEA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1634068144</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Elaborating Procedural Fairness: Justice Becomes Both Simpler and more Complex</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>SAGE Journals</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><creator>Folger, Robert ; Cropanzano, Russell ; Timmerman, Thomas A. ; Howes, John C. ; Mitchell, David</creator><creatorcontrib>Folger, Robert ; Cropanzano, Russell ; Timmerman, Thomas A. ; Howes, John C. ; Mitchell, David</creatorcontrib><description>Past research has indicated the importance of disputant voice in determining the fairness of conflict resolution procedures, but some conflicting data have called the role of voice into question. The authors review the role of voice in procedural fairness and conclude that some of those negative results were due to a confounded research design. In three studies, this problem was corrected, and additional data were collected. Contrary to the earlier findings, results show that when other factors are equated, participants prefer the conflict resolution procedures that offer the most voice. The authors further note, however, that factors such as the role of the decision maker are also important in determining fairness.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0146-1672</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-7433</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0146167296225001</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PSPBZZ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Conflict resolution ; Decision making ; Judicial process ; Justice ; Procedural justice ; Role ; Social psychology ; Voices</subject><ispartof>Personality & social psychology bulletin, 1996-05, Vol.22 (5), p.435-441</ispartof><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. May 1996</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-b50d9f78f2ee475fc7ee0f17834781dfcb598c0654d89d71629b28f78d2bd46c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-b50d9f78f2ee475fc7ee0f17834781dfcb598c0654d89d71629b28f78d2bd46c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0146167296225001$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0146167296225001$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,21824,27874,27929,27930,31004,31005,33779,43626,43627</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Folger, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cropanzano, Russell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Timmerman, Thomas A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Howes, John C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, David</creatorcontrib><title>Elaborating Procedural Fairness: Justice Becomes Both Simpler and more Complex</title><title>Personality & social psychology bulletin</title><description>Past research has indicated the importance of disputant voice in determining the fairness of conflict resolution procedures, but some conflicting data have called the role of voice into question. The authors review the role of voice in procedural fairness and conclude that some of those negative results were due to a confounded research design. In three studies, this problem was corrected, and additional data were collected. Contrary to the earlier findings, results show that when other factors are equated, participants prefer the conflict resolution procedures that offer the most voice. The authors further note, however, that factors such as the role of the decision maker are also important in determining fairness.</description><subject>Conflict resolution</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Judicial process</subject><subject>Justice</subject><subject>Procedural justice</subject><subject>Role</subject><subject>Social psychology</subject><subject>Voices</subject><issn>0146-1672</issn><issn>1552-7433</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1996</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc1Lw0AUxBdRsFbvHhcFb9H93o03W1o_KCqo57DZvNSUJFt3E9D_3pR6kEJPD2Z-MzwYhM4puaZU6xtChaJKs1QxJgmhB2hEpWSJFpwfotHGTjb-MTqJcUUIEUqwEXqe1Tb3wXZVu8SvwTso-mBrPLdVaCHGW_zUx65ygCfgfAMRT3z3id-qZl1DwLYtcOMD4KnfCN-n6Ki0dYSzvztGH_PZ-_QhWbzcP07vFonjSnZJLkmRltqUDEBoWToNQEqqDRfa0KJ0uUyNI0qKwqSFpoqlOTNDoGB5IZTjY3S17V0H_9VD7LKmig7q2rbg-5hJLaTh1AzgxQ648n1oh98yRnmapkSTAbrcB1HFBVGGCjFQZEu54GMMUGbrUDU2_GSUZJsNst0NhkiyjUS7hH-l-_hfE4KEEA</recordid><startdate>19960501</startdate><enddate>19960501</enddate><creator>Folger, Robert</creator><creator>Cropanzano, Russell</creator><creator>Timmerman, Thomas A.</creator><creator>Howes, John C.</creator><creator>Mitchell, David</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications, Inc</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>HOKLE</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19960501</creationdate><title>Elaborating Procedural Fairness: Justice Becomes Both Simpler and more Complex</title><author>Folger, Robert ; Cropanzano, Russell ; Timmerman, Thomas A. ; Howes, John C. ; Mitchell, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-b50d9f78f2ee475fc7ee0f17834781dfcb598c0654d89d71629b28f78d2bd46c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1996</creationdate><topic>Conflict resolution</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Judicial process</topic><topic>Justice</topic><topic>Procedural justice</topic><topic>Role</topic><topic>Social psychology</topic><topic>Voices</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Folger, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cropanzano, Russell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Timmerman, Thomas A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Howes, John C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, David</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 22</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Personality & social psychology bulletin</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Folger, Robert</au><au>Cropanzano, Russell</au><au>Timmerman, Thomas A.</au><au>Howes, John C.</au><au>Mitchell, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Elaborating Procedural Fairness: Justice Becomes Both Simpler and more Complex</atitle><jtitle>Personality & social psychology bulletin</jtitle><date>1996-05-01</date><risdate>1996</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>435</spage><epage>441</epage><pages>435-441</pages><issn>0146-1672</issn><eissn>1552-7433</eissn><coden>PSPBZZ</coden><abstract>Past research has indicated the importance of disputant voice in determining the fairness of conflict resolution procedures, but some conflicting data have called the role of voice into question. The authors review the role of voice in procedural fairness and conclude that some of those negative results were due to a confounded research design. In three studies, this problem was corrected, and additional data were collected. Contrary to the earlier findings, results show that when other factors are equated, participants prefer the conflict resolution procedures that offer the most voice. The authors further note, however, that factors such as the role of the decision maker are also important in determining fairness.</abstract><cop>Thousand Oaks, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0146167296225001</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0146-1672 |
| ispartof | Personality & social psychology bulletin, 1996-05, Vol.22 (5), p.435-441 |
| issn | 0146-1672 1552-7433 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_57458318 |
| source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); SAGE Journals; Sociological Abstracts; Periodicals Index Online |
| subjects | Conflict resolution Decision making Judicial process Justice Procedural justice Role Social psychology Voices |
| title | Elaborating Procedural Fairness: Justice Becomes Both Simpler and more Complex |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T18%3A18%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Elaborating%20Procedural%20Fairness:%20Justice%20Becomes%20Both%20Simpler%20and%20more%20Complex&rft.jtitle=Personality%20&%20social%20psychology%20bulletin&rft.au=Folger,%20Robert&rft.date=1996-05-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=435&rft.epage=441&rft.pages=435-441&rft.issn=0146-1672&rft.eissn=1552-7433&rft.coden=PSPBZZ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0146167296225001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E9666238%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1634068144&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0146167296225001&rfr_iscdi=true |