Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T01:53:41.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

26 - Feeling the Heat

The Importance of Affect to Organizational Justice for Receivers, Actors, and Observers

from Part IV - Workplace Affect and Organizational, Social, and Cultural Processes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2020

By
Brent A. Scott  and
Jocelyn Alisa Dana-Lê
Edited by
Liu-Qin Yang ,
Russell Cropanzano ,
Catherine S. Daus  and
Vicente Martínez-Tur
Liu-Qin Yang
Affiliation:
Portland State University
Russell Cropanzano
Affiliation:
University of Colorado
Catherine S. Daus
Affiliation:
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
Vicente Martínez-Tur
Affiliation:
Universitat de València, Spain
Get access

Summary

Broadly, the literature on organizational justice is concerned with a key question that employees often ask themselves when evaluating events that occur at work: “Was that fair?” (Colquitt, 2012, p. 526). Decades of research on organizational justice have revealed that individuals assess fairness when evaluating a) the outcomes they receive, including whether they are equitable (distributive justice: Adams, 1965; Leventhal, 1976), b) the procedures used to determine those outcomes, including whether they are consistent, accurate, unbiased, correctable, and provide voice and input (procedural justice: Leventhal, 1980; Thibaut & Walker, 1975), c) the information conveyed by authority figures, including whether it is honest and detailed (informational justice: Bies & Moag, 1986; Greenberg, 1993), and d) the interpersonal treatment they receive during interactions, including whether it is respectful and polite (interpersonal justice: Bies & Moag, 1986; Greenberg, 1993). The answers they receive to these questions (i.e. how fair or unfair an event was) are critical, as greater perceptions of fairness have been consistently linked to key outcomes such as well-being, job attitudes, and various indicators of job performance (for a meta-analysis, see Colquitt, Scott, Rodell, Long, Zapata, Conlon, & Wesson, 2013).

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Workplace Affect , pp. 350 - 362
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz, L (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Volume 2, pp. 267–299). New York, NY: Academic.Google Scholar
Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 491–500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barclay, L. J., & Scarlicki, D. P. (2009). Healing the wounds of organizational injustice: Examining the benefits of expressive writing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 511–523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barsky, A., & Kaplan, S. A. (2007). If you feel bad, it’s unfair: A quantitative synthesis of affect and organizational justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 286–295.Google Scholar
Barsky, A., Kaplan, S. A., & Beal, D. J. (2011). Just feelings? The role of affect in the formation of organizational fairness judgements. Journal of Management, 37, 248–279.Google Scholar
Bies, R. J. (1987). The predicament of injustice: The management of moral outrage. In Cummings, L. L. & Staw, B. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Volume 9, pp. 289–319). Greenwich, CT: JAI.Google Scholar
Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In Lewicki, R. J., Sheppard, B. H., & Bazerman, M. H. (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (Volume 1, pp. 43–55). Greenwich, CT: JAI.Google Scholar
Blanken, I., van de Ven, N., & Zeelenberg, M. A. (2015). A meta-analytic review of moral licensing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 540–558.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Brockner, J., Wiesenfeld, B. M., & Diekmann, K. A. (2009). Towards a “fairer” conception of process fairness: Why, when, and how more may not always be better than less. Academy of Management Annals, 3, 183–216.Google Scholar
Colquitt, J. A. (2012). Organizational justice. In Kozlowski, S. W. J. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational psychology (Volume 1, pp. 526–547). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., Greenberg, J., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2005). What is organizational justice? A historical overview. In Greenberg, J & Colquitt, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 3–56). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., Long, D. M., Rodell, J. B., & Halvorsen-Ganepola, M. D. K. (2015). Adding the “In” to justice: A qualitative and quantitative investigation of the differential effects of justice rule adherence and violation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 278–297.Google Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., & Rodell, J. B. (2015). Measuring justice and fairness. In Cropanzano, R & Ambrose, M (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of justice in work organizations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D. E., & Wesson, M. J. (2013). Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 199–236.Google Scholar
De Cremer, D., Stinglhamber, F., & Eisenberger, R. (2005). Effects of own versus others’ fair treatment on positive emotions: A field study. Journal of Social Psychology, 145, 741–744.Google Scholar
Degoey, P. (2000). Contagious justice: Exploring the social construction of justice in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, 51–102.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. R., Caplan, R. D., & Harrison, R. V. (1998). Person–environment fit theory: Conceptual foundations, empirical evidence, and directions for future research. In Cooper, C. L. (Ed.), Theories of organizational stress (pp. 28–67). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.Google Scholar
Folger, R. (2001). Fairness as deonance. In Gilliland, S. W., Steiner, D. D., & Scarlicki, D. P. (Eds.), Research in social issues in management (Volume 1, pp. 3–33). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (2001). Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. In Greenberg, J & Cropanzano, R (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 89–118). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Miles, D. (2001). Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) in response to job stressors and organizational justice: Some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and emotions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 291–309.Google Scholar
Frijda, N. H. (2007). The laws of emotion. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Geenen, B., Proost, K., van Dijke, M., de Witte, K., & von Grumbkow, J. (2012). The role of affect in the relationship between distributive justice expectations and applicants’ recommendation and litigation intentions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20, 404–413.Google Scholar
George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2007). Dual tuning in a supportive context: Joint contributions of positive mood, megative mood, and supervisory behaviors to employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 605–622.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, R. L., Quade, M. J., Mawritz, M. B., Kim, J., & Crosby, D. (2014). When the customer is unethical: The explanatory role of employee emotional exhaustion onto work–family conflict, relationship conflict with coworkers, and job neglect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 1188–1203.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. (1993). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In Cropanzano, R (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 79–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J., Ashton-James, C. E., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2007). Social comparison processes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102, 22–41.Google Scholar
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Homans, G. C. (1961). Social behavior: Its elementary forms. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
Horberg, E. J., Kraus, M. W., & Keltner, D. (2013). Pride displays communicate self-interest and support for meritocracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 24–37.Google Scholar
Janssen, O., Lam, C. K., & Huang, X. (2009). Emotional exhaustion and job performance: The moderating roles of distributive justice and positive affect. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 787–809.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Scott, B. A., & Ilies, R. (2006). Hostility, job attitudes, and workplace deviance: Test of a multilevel model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 126–138.Google Scholar
Khan, A. K., Quratulain, S., & Bell, C. M. (2014). Episodic envy and counterproductive work behaviors: Is more justice always good? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 128–144.Google Scholar
Klaussner, S. (2014). Engulfed in the abyss: The emergence of abusive supervision as an escalating process of supervisor–subordinate interaction. Human Relations, 67, 311–332.Google Scholar
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Progress on a cognitive–motivational–relational theory of emotion. American Psychologist, 46, 819–834.Google Scholar
Leventhal, G. S. (1976). The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organizations. In Berkowitz, L & Walster, W (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Volume 9, pp. 91–131). New York, NY: Academic.Google Scholar
Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In Gergen, K, Greenberg, M, & Willis, R (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27–55). New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
Long, E. C., & Christian, M. S (2015). Mindfulness buffers retaliatory responses to injustice: A regulatory approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1409–1422.Google Scholar
Matta, F. K., Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., Koopman, J., & Passantino, L. G. (2017). Is consistently unfair better than sporadically fair? An investigation of justice variability and stress. Academy of Management Journal, 60, 743–770.Google Scholar
Naumann, S. E., & Bennett, N. (2000). A case for procedural justice climate: Development and test of a multilevel model. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 881–889.Google Scholar
Paterson, J. M., & Cary, J. (2002). Organizational justice, change anxiety, and acceptance of downsizing: Preliminary tests of an AET-based model. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 83–103.Google Scholar
Razzaq, A., Iqbal, M. Z., Ikramullah, M., & Prooijen, J. W. V. (2016). Occurrence of rating distortions and ratees’ fairness perceptions per raters’ mood and affect. Career Development International, 21, 726–743.Google Scholar
Roberson, Q. M., & Colquitt, J. A. (2005). Shared and configural justice: A social network model of justice in teams. Academy of Management Review, 30, 595–607.Google Scholar
Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513–523.Google Scholar
Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Paddock, E. L. (2009). An actor-focused model of justice rule adherence and violation: The role of managerial motives and discretion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 756–769.Google Scholar
Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2007). Justice as a dependent variable: Subordinate charisma as a predictor of interpersonal and informational justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1597–1609.Google Scholar
Scott, B. A., Garza, A., Conlon, D. E., & Kim, Y. J. (2014). Why do managers act fairly in the first place? A daily investigation of “hot” and “cold” motives and discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 57, 1571–1591.Google Scholar
Sinclair, R. C., & Mark, M. M. (1991). Mood and the endorsement of egalitarian macrojustice versus equity-based microjustice principles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 369–375.Google Scholar
Skarlicki, D. P., & Kulik, C. T. (2004). Third-party reactions to employee (mis)treatment: A justice perspective. Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 183–229.Google Scholar
Spector, A. J. (1956). Expectations, fulfillment, and morale. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 52, 51–56.Google Scholar
Spencer, S., & Rupp, D. E. (2009). Angry, guilty, and conflicted: Injustice toward coworkers heightens emotional labor through cognitive and emotional mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 429–444.Google Scholar
Stouffer, S. A., Suchman, E. A., DeVinney, L. C., Starr, S. A., & Williams, R. M., Jr. (1949). The American solider: Adjustment during army life, Volume 1. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, S. E. (1991). Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: The mobilization–minimization hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 67–85.Google Scholar
Tepper, B. J., Dimotakis, N., Lambert, L. S., Koopman, J., Matta, F. K., Park, H. M., & Goo, W. (2018). Examining follower responses to transformational leadership from a dynamic, person–environment fit perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 61, 1343–1368.Google Scholar
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
van den Bos, K. (2003). On the subjective quality of social justice: The role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 482–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Dijke, M., Wildschut, T., Leunissen, J. M., & Sedikides, C. (2015). Nostalgia buffers the negative impact of low procedural justice on cooperation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 127, 15–29.Google Scholar
van Kleef, G. A. (2009). How emotions regulate social life: The emotions as social information (EASI) model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 184–188.Google Scholar
Wang, M., Liao, H., Zhan, Y., & Shi, J. (2011). Daily customer mistreatment and employee sabotage against customers: Examining emotion and resource perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 312–334.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In Staw, B. M. & Cummings, L. L. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Volume 18, pp. 1–74). Greenwich, CT, and London, UK: Elsevier Science/JAI.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). Effects of justice conditions on discrete emotions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 786–794.Google Scholar
Wilkin, C. L., & Connelly, C. E. (2015). Green with envy and nerves of steel: Moderated mediation between distributive justice and theft. Personality and Individual Differences, 72, 160–164.Google Scholar
Yang, J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). The relations of daily counterproductive workplace behavior with emotions, situational antecedents, and personality moderators: A diary study in Hong Kong. Personnel Psychology, 62, 259–295.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×