Procedural Fairness, Outcome Favorability, and Judgments of an Authority's Responsibility
Coauthor(s): Ariel Fishman, Jochen Reb, Barry Goldman, Scott Spiegel, Charlee Garden.
Fairness theory (R. Folger & R. Cropanzano, 1998, 2001) postulates that, particularly in the face of unfavorable outcomes, employees judge an organizational authority to be more responsible for their
outcomes when the authority exhibits lower procedural fairness. Three studies lent empirical support to this notion. Furthermore, 2 of the studies showed that attributions of responsibility to the authority
mediated the relationship between the authority?s procedural fairness and employees? reactions to unfavorable outcomes. The findings (a) provide support for a key assumption of fairness theory, (b) help
to account for the pervasive interactive effect of procedural fairness and outcome favorability on
employees? attitudes and behaviors, and (c) contribute to an emerging trend in justice research concerned
with how people use procedural fairness information to make attributions of responsibility for their
outcomes. Practical implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research also are discussed.
Source: Journal of Applied Psychology
Brockner, Joel, Ariel Fishman, Jochen Reb, Barry Goldman, Scott Spiegel, and Charlee Garden. "Procedural Fairness, Outcome Favorability, and Judgments of an Authority's Responsibility." Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 6 (2007): 1657-1671.