Primacy Effects in Justice Judgments: Testing Predictions from Fairness Heuristic Theory
- PMID: 11461198
- DOI: 10.1006/obhd.2000.2937
Primacy Effects in Justice Judgments: Testing Predictions from Fairness Heuristic Theory
Abstract
We tested predictions from fairness heuristic theory that justice judgments are more sensitive to early fairness-relevant information than to later fairness-relevant information and that this primacy effect is more evident when group identification is higher. Participants working on a series of three tasks experienced resource failures that interfered with their productivity and always had the possibility of explaining problems to a supervisor. In a manipulation of the timing of fairness-relevant experiences, the supervisor refused to consider explanations on the first, second, or third of three work trials (but did consider explanations on the other two trials) or the supervisor never refused to hear the explanations. Prior to the work periods, the participants either had or had not undergone a manipulation designed to induce greater identification with the work group. As predicted, the timing of fairness-relevant experiences showed a primacy effect on fairness judgments and acceptance of authority in the high identification conditions and no evidence of such an effect in the low identification conditions. The implications of the findings for understanding the psychology of justice and for real-world justice phenomena are discussed. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.
Similar articles
-
Fairness heuristic theory is an empirical framework: a reply to Arnadóttir.Scand J Psychol. 2004 Jul;45(3):265-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2004.00404.x. Scand J Psychol. 2004. PMID: 15182246
-
The role of authority power in explaining procedural fairness effects.J Appl Psychol. 2010 May;95(3):488-502. doi: 10.1037/a0018921. J Appl Psychol. 2010. PMID: 20476828
-
Procedural fairness, outcome favorability, and judgments of an authority's responsibility.J Appl Psychol. 2007 Nov;92(6):1657-71. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1657. J Appl Psychol. 2007. PMID: 18020803
-
To justify or excuse?: A meta-analytic review of the effects of explanations.J Appl Psychol. 2003 Jun;88(3):444-58. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.444. J Appl Psychol. 2003. PMID: 12814294 Review.
-
Pandemic fairness and academia.J Law Biosci. 2020 May 20;7(1):lsaa030. doi: 10.1093/jlb/lsaa030. eCollection 2020 Jan-Jun. J Law Biosci. 2020. PMID: 32733689 Free PMC article. Review. No abstract available.
Cited by
-
The Impact of Career Plateaus on Job Performance: The Roles of Organizational Justice and Positive Psychological Capital.Behav Sci (Basel). 2024 Feb 18;14(2):144. doi: 10.3390/bs14020144. Behav Sci (Basel). 2024. PMID: 38392497 Free PMC article.
-
The impact of teaching-research conflict on turnover intention: cross-level interaction effect of justice climate.Front Psychol. 2023 Nov 29;14:1283477. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1283477. eCollection 2023. Front Psychol. 2023. PMID: 38094707 Free PMC article.
-
Perceived overall injustice and organizational deviance-Mediating effect of anger and moderating effect of moral disengagement.Front Psychol. 2022 Dec 5;13:1023724. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1023724. eCollection 2022. Front Psychol. 2022. PMID: 36544441 Free PMC article.
-
The Synergistic Effects of Organizational Justice and Trust to Supervisor on Vagal Tone: Preliminary Findings of an Empirical Investigation.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Mar 4;16(5):790. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16050790. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019. PMID: 30836704 Free PMC article.
-
The Effects of Stability and Presentation Order of Rewards on Justice Evaluations.PLoS One. 2016 Dec 22;11(12):e0168956. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168956. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 28005957 Free PMC article.
LinkOut - more resources
Research Materials