Browsing by Author "Flinder, Sharon W."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Distributive and procedural justice: effects of outcomes, inputs and procedures
    Flinder, Sharon W. (Virginia Tech, 1994-04-05)
    The purpose of the current study was to investigate whether the separate contributors to procedural and distributive justice also affected the other form of justice. Previous research investigating these cross over effects of justice contributors had not examined inputs in addition to outcomes and procedures, and had typically assumed outcome level to be equivalent to the equitableness of outcomes. Subjects were 120 undergraduate psychology students. Outcomes, inputs and procedures were manipulated in a laboratory experiment in order to assess their independent and combined effects on distributive and procedural justice perceptions. In contrast to past research, the current study found a weak and inconsistent effect of procedures on distributive justice perceptions. Outcome level had a strong effect on both procedural and distributive justice perceptions. In addition, outcome fairness was found to effect procedural justice perceptions. When procedures were fair, the equitableness of outcomes influenced distributive justice ratings. When procedures were unfair, however, the equitableness of outcomes did not influence distributive justice judgements. Implications for procedural justice conceptualizations, equity theory and organizations are discussed.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Locus of control as a moderator of the relationship between influence and procedural justice
    Flinder, Sharon W. (Virginia Tech, 1991-01-15)
    The present field experiment investigated the interaction between influence and locus of control in determining procedural justice and satisfaction, in a classroom situation. Perceptions of influence accounted for unique variance in procedural justice and satisfaction. The proposed moderating effects of locus of control on the influence-procedural justice and influence-satisfaction relationships were not supported. Unfortunately, the manipulation of influence was unsuccessful, and several methodological considerations are proposed for future research.