Abstract
This article reviews the existing research and theory on procedural justice and considers how it may be applied to the study of organizational behavior. It begins by distinguishing between the concepts of distributive justice and procedural justice and noting the historical contexts within which they emerged. Existing conceptual contributions and the research inspired by them are reviewed. The few existing studies applying procedural justice notions to organizational contexts are summarized, and the contributions of the articles to the present issue of this journal are reviewed relative to these efforts. The article closes by discussing the dual benefits of studying procedural justice in organizations: the enhanced understanding of the concept of justice and the behavior of people in organizations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequaity.J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 67: 422–436.
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2, Academic Press, New York, pp. 267–299.
Adler, J. W., Hensler, D. R., and Nelson, C. E. (1983).Simple Justice: How Litigants Fare in the Pittsburgh Court Arbitration Program, Rand Corp., Santa Monica, CA.
Anderson, J. K., and Hayden, R. M. (1980–1981). Questions of validity and drawing conclusions from simulation studies in procedural justice.Law Soc. Rev. 15: 293–304.
Barrett-Howard, E., and Tyler, T. R. (1986). Procedural justice as a criterion in allocation decisions.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50: 296–304.
Cohen, R. L., and Greenberg, J. (1982). The justice concept in social psychology. In Greenberg, J., and Cohen, R. L. (eds.),Equity and Justice in Social Behavior, Academic Press, New York, pp. 1–41.
Crosby, F. (1984). Relative deprivation in organizational settings. In Staw, B. M., and Cummings, L. L. (eds.),Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 6, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 51–94.
Dalton, D. R., and Todor, W. D. (1985a). Gender and workplace justice: A field assessment.Personnel Psychol. 38: 133–151.
Dalton, D. R., and Todor, W. D. (1985b). Composition of dyads as a factor in the outcomes of workplace justice: Two field assessments.Acad. Manag. J. 28: 704–712.
Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis for distributive justice?J. Soc. Issues 31: 137–149.
Dipboye, R. L., and de Pontbraind, R. (1981). Correlates of employee reactions to performance appraisals and appraisal systems.J. Appl. Psychol. 66: 248–251.
Festinger, L. (1957).A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Evanston, Row, Peterson, Evanston, IL.
Folger, R. (1986). Rethinking equity theory: A referent cognitions model. In Bierhoff, H. W., Cohen, R. L., and Greenberg, J. (eds.),Justice in Social Relations, Plenum Press, New York.
Folger, R., and Greenberg, J. (1985). Procedural justice: An interpretive analysis of personnel systems. In Rowland, K., and Ferris, G. (eds.),Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 3, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 141–183.
Fry, W. R., and Cheney, G. (1981)Perceptions of procedural fairness as a function of distributive preference. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Detroit.
Fry, W. R., and Leventhal, G. S. (1979). Cross-situational procedural preferences: A comparison of allocation preferences and equity across different social settings. In Lind, A. (Chair),The Psychology of Procedural Justice. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Southwestern Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
Fuller, L. (1961). The adversary system. In Berman, H. (ed.),Talks on American Law, Vintage Books, New York.
Greenberg, J. (1982). Approaching equity and avoiding inequity in groups and organizations. In Greenberg, J., and Cohen, R. L. (eds.),Equity and Justice in Social Behavior, Academic Press, New York, pp. 389–435.
Greenberg, J. (1986a). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations.J. Appl. Psychol. 71: 340–342.
Greenberg, J. (1986b). Organizational performance appraisal procedures: What makes them fair? In Lewicki, R. J., Sheppard, B. H., and Bazerman, M. (eds.),Research on Negotiation in Organizations, JAI Press, Greenwich.
Greenberg, J. (1987). Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions: Do the means justify the ends?J. Appl. Psychol. 72: 55–61.
Greenberg, J., and Folger, R. (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In Paulus, P. B. (ed.),Basic Group Processes, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 235–256.
Hayden, R. M., and Anderson, J. K. (1979). On the evaluation of procedural systems in laboratory experiments.Law Hum. Behav. 3: 21–33.
Homans, G. C. (1961).Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms, Harcourt, Brace, and World, New York.
Houlden, P. (1980–1981). Impact of procedural modifications on evaluations of plea bargaining.Law Soc. Rev. 15: 267–292.
Ilgen, D. R., and Feldman, J. M. (1983). Performance appraisal: A process focus. In Staw, B. M., and Cummings, L. L. (eds.),Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 5, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 141–197.
Jacques, E. (1961).Equitable Payment, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Landy, F. J., Barnes, J. L., and Murphy, K. R. (1978). Correlates of perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation.J. Appl. Psychol. 63: 751–754.
Landy, F. J., Barnes-Farrell, J., and Cleveland, J. N. (1980). Perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation: A follow-up.J. Appl. Psychol. 65: 355–356.
Leventhal, G. S. (1976a). Fairness in social relationships. In Thibaut, J. W., Spence, J. T., and Carson, R. C. (eds.),Contemporary Topics in Social Psychology, General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ, pp. 211–239.
Leventhal, G. S. (1976b). The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organizations. In Berkowitz, L., and Walster, E. (eds.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 9, Academic Press, New York, pp. 91–131.
Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? In Gergen, K. J., Greenberg, M. S., and Willis, R. H. (eds.),Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 27–55.
Leventhal, G. S., Karuza, J., and Fry, W. R. (1980). Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences. In Mikula, G. (ed.),Justice and Social Interaction, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 167–218.
Lind, E. A. (1982).The social psychology of procedural justice. Paper presented at the University of North Carolina Alumni and Friends Conference, Chapel Hill, NC.
Lind, E. A., Kurtz, S., Musante, L., Walker, L., and Thibaut, J. W. (1980). Procedure and outcome effects on reactions to adjudicated resolution of conflicts of interest.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 39: 643–653.
Lind, E. A., Lissak, R. I., and Conlon, A. E. (1983). Decision control and process control effects on procedural fairness judgments.J. Appl. Psychol. 13: 338–350.
Lissak, R. I. (1983).Procedural fairness: How employees evaluate procedures. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Champaign.
Pritchard, R. A. (1969). Equity theory: A review and critique.Org. Behav. Hum. Perf. 4: 75–94.
Reis, H. T. (1986). Levels of interest in the study of interpersonal justice. In Bierhoff, H. W., Cohen, R. L., and Greenberg, J. (eds.),Justice in Social Relations, Plenum Press, New York.
Ross, W. D. (1925).The Oxford Translation of Aristotle, Vol. 9: The Nichomachean Ethics, Oxford University Press, London.
Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. (1975).Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure.Calif. Law Rev. 66: 541–566.
Tyler, T. R. (1984). The role of perceived injustice in defendant's evaluations of their courtroom experience.Law Soc. Rev. 18: 51–74.
Tyler, T. R. (1986). When does procedural justice matter in organizations? In Lewicki, R. J., Sheppard, B. H., and Bazerman, M. (eds.),Research on Negotiation in Organizations, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
Tyler, T. R., and Caine, A. (1981). The role of distributional and procedural fairness in the endorsement of formal leaders.J. Pers. and Soc. Psychol. 41: 642–655.
Tyler, T. R., and Folger, R. (1980). Distributional and procedural aspects of satisfaction with citizen-police encounters.Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1: 281–292.
Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K., and Spodick, N. (1985). The influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders: Exploring the meaning of process control.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 48: 72–81.
Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K., and McGraw, K. (1985). The influence of perceived injustice on the endorsement of political leaders.J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 15: 700–725.
Walker, L., LaTour, S., Lind, E. A., and Thibaut, J. (1974). Reactions of participants and observers to modes of adjudication.J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 4: 295–310.
Walker, L., Lind, E. A., and Thibaut, J. (1979). The relation between procedural justice and distributive justice.Va. Law Rev. 65: 1401–1420.
Walster, E., Walster, G. W., and Berscheid, E. (1978).Equity: Theory and Research Allyn & Bacon, Boston.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Greenberg, J., Tyler, T.R. Why procedural justice in organizations?. Soc Just Res 1, 127–142 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01048012
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01048012