Abstract
This study examines the effect of four variables (i.e., interpersonal treatment, organizational reputation, testing context, and consequence of testing) on perceptions of the procedural fairness of a drug-testing program. Main effects for each of these variables on perceptions of procedural fairness were expected. In addition, interactions were predicted between interpersonal treatment and organizational reputation, testing context and consequence, and testing context and interpersonal treatment. Results generally supported the hypotheses, revealing main effects for the four variables and two significant interactions. The implications of these findings for justice research and the design and implementation of drug-testing programs are discussed.
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. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2. New York, Academic Press, pp. 267–299.
Ackerman, S. (1989). Drug testing: The state of the art. Am. Sci. 77: 19–23.
Ambrose, M. L., Harland, L. K., and Kulik, C. T. (1991). Influence of social comparisons on perceptions of organizational fairness. J. Appl. Psych. 76: 239–246.
Bahls, J. E. (1998). Dealing with drugs: Keepir legal. HR Magazine 43: 104–110.
Bies, R. J. (1985). Individual reactions to corporate recruiting encounters: The importance of fairness. Unpublished manuscript.
Bies, R. J., and Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In Lewicki, R. J., Sheppard, B. H., and Bazerman, M. H. (eds.), Research on Negotiations in Organizations, Vol. 1, Greenwich, CT, JAI Press, pp. 43–55.
Brockner, J., Tyler, T. R., and Cooper-Schneider, R. (1992). The influence of prior commitment to an institution on reactions of perceived unfairness: The higher they are, the harder they fall. Admin. Sci. Quart. 37: 241–261.
Brockner, J., and Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: The interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psych. Bull. 120: 189–208.
Companies adding and expanding workplace drug testing programs at record pace. Business Wire, April 1, 1993.
Crant, J. M., and Bateman, T. S. (1989). A model of employee responses to drug-testing programs. Employee Resp. Rights J. 2: 173–190.
Crant, J. M., and Bateman, T. S. (1990). An experimental test of the impact of drug-testing programs on potential job applicants' attitudes and intentions. J. Appl. Psych. 75: 127–131.
Cropanzano, R., and Folger, R. (1989). Reference cognitions and task decision autonomy: Beyond equity theory. J. Appl. Psych. 74: 293–299.
Cropanzano, R., and Folger, R. (1991). Procedural justice and worker motivation. In Steers, R. M., and Porter, L.W. (eds.), Motivation andWork Behavior, 5th Ed. NewYork, McGraw-Hill, pp. 131–143.
Cropanzano, R., and Greenberg, J. (1997). Progress in organizational justice: Tunneling through the maze. In Robertson, L. T., and Cooper, C. L. (eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. New York, John Wiley & Sons.
Cropanzano, R., and Konovsky, M. A. (1995). Resolving the justice dilemma by improving the outcomes: The case of employee drug testing. J. Bus. Psych. 10: 221–243.
Crown, D. F., and Rosse, J. G. (1988). A critical review of the assumptions underlying drug testing. J. Bus. Psych. 3: 22–41.
“Drug testing grows, AMA study finds.” (1996). Man. Off. Technol. 41: 23.
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. New York: Plenum.
Folger, R., and Bies, R. J. (1989). Managerial responsibilities and procedural justice. Employee Respons. Rights J. 2: 79–90.
Garland, H., Giacobbe, J., and French, J. L. (1989). Attitudes toward employee and employer rights in the workplace. Employee Respons. Rights J. 2: 49–59.
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., and Balkin, D. B. (1987). Dimensions and characteristics of personnel manager perceptions of effective drug-testing programs. Person. Psych. 40: 745–764.
Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Acad. Manag. Rev. 12(1): 9–22.
Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. J. Manag. 16: 399–432.
Greenberg, J. (1993). Stealing in the name of justice: Informational and interpersonal moderators of theft reactions to underpayment inequity. Organiz. Behav. Hum. Decis. Proc. 54: 81–103.
Greenberg, J., and Folger, R. (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, Greenwich, CT, JAI Press, pp. 141–183.
Huo, Y. J., Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., and Lind, E. A. (1996). Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns: Is separatism the problem; Is assimilation the answer? Psych. Sci. 7: 40–45.
Konovsky, M. A., and Cropanzano, R. (1991). Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance. J. Appl. Psych. 76: 698–707.
Konovsky, M. A., and Cropanzano, R. (1995). Justice considerations in employee drug testing. In Cropanzano, R. (ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 171–192.
Labig, C. E., Jr. (1992). Supervisory and nonsupervisory employee attitude about drug testing. Employee Respons. Rights J. 5: 131–141.
Lahey, J. W. (1986). Who's rights are violated? Nat. Safety Health News 133: 26–31.
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, New York, Plenum, pp. 27–55.
Lind, E. A. (1992). The fairness heuristic: Rationality and “relationality” in procedural evaluations. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference of the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics, Irvine, CA.
Lind, E. A. (1994). Procedural justice, disputing, and reactions to legal authorities. (ABF Working Paper No. 9402). Chicago: American Bar Foundation.
Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., and Early, P. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and non-instrumental concerns in fairness judgments. J. Person. Soc. Psych. 59: 952–959.
Lind, E. A., Kulik, C. T., Ambrose, M. L., and de Vera, M.V. 1993. Individual and corporate dispute resolution: Using procedural fairness as a decision heuristic. Admin. Sci. Quart. 38: 224–251.
Lind, E. A., and Lissak, R. I. (1985). Apparent impropriety and procedural fairness judgments. J. Exp. Soc. Psych. 21: 19–29.
Lind, E. A., and Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York, Plenum.
Masters, M. F., Ferris, G. R., and Ratcliff, S. L. (1988). Practices and attitudes of substance abuse testing. Person. Admin. 33: 72–78.
McDaniel, M. A. (1988). Does pre-employment drug use predict on the job suitability. Person. Psych. 41: 717–729.
Murphy, K. R., Thornton, G. C., and Reynolds, D. H. (1990). College students' attitudes toward employee drug testing programs. Person. Psych. 43: 615–631.
Norman, J., Salyards, S. D., and Mahoney, J. J. (1990). An evaluation of preemployment drug testing. J. App. Psych. 75: 629–639.
O'Keefe, A. M. (1987). The case against drug testing. Psych. Today 21: 34–38.
“One-quarter of firms said to screen employees.” (1986). The National Report on Substance Abuse 1: 4–5.
Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological Contracts in Organizations: Understanding Written and Unwritten Agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Smither, J. W., Millsap, R. E., and Snoffey, R. W. (1996). An experimental test of the influence of selection procedures on fairness perceptions, attitudes about the organization, and job pursuit intentions. J. Bos. Psych. 10: 297–318.
Stone, D. L., and Kotch, D. A. (1989). Individuals' attitudes toward organizational drug testing policies and practices. J. App. Psych. 74: 518–521.
Tepper, B. J., and Braun, C. K. (1995). Does the experience of organizational justice mitigate the invasion of privacy engendered by random drug testing? An experimental investigation. Basic Appl. Soc. Psych. 16: 211–225.
Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tyler, T. R., and Bies, R. J. (1990). Beyond formal procedures: The interpersonal context of procedural justice. In Carrol, J. S. (ed.), Applied Social Psychology in Organizational Settings, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum, pp. 77–98.
Tyler, T. R., and Degoey, P. (1995). Collective restraint in social dilemmas: Procedural justice and social identification effects on support for authorities. J. Person. Soc. Psych. 69: 482–497.
van Den Bos, K., Vermunt, R., and Wilke, H. A. M. (1997). Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. J. Person. Soc. Psych. 72:95–104.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ambrose, M.L. Drug Testing and Procedural Fairness: The Influence of Situational Variables. Social Justice Research 13, 25–40 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007523802197
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007523802197