How do I judge my outcome when I do not know the outcome of others? The psychology of the fair process effect
- PMID: 9150583
- DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.72.5.1034
How do I judge my outcome when I do not know the outcome of others? The psychology of the fair process effect
Abstract
On the basis of fairness heuristic theory, the authors provide an explanation of the frequently replicated fair process effect (the finding that perceived procedural fairness positively affects how people react to outcomes). The authors argue that, in many situations, people may find it difficult to assess whether their outcome is fair or unfair and satisfying or unsatisfying because they only have information about their own outcome and they do not know the outcomes of others and that, in these situations, people use the fairness of the procedure as a heuristic substitute to assess how to judge their outcome. The results of 2 experiments corroborate the authors' line of reasoning. Findings are discussed in terms of recent developments toward an integration of the procedural and distributive justice domains.
Similar articles
-
Toward understanding why fairness matters: the influence of mortality salience on reactions to procedural fairness.J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 Sep;79(3):355-66. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.3.355. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000. PMID: 10981839 Clinical Trial.
-
Uncertainty management: the influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness.J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001 Jun;80(6):931-41. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001. PMID: 11414375 Clinical Trial.
-
Trust in decision-making authorities dictates the form of the interactive relationship between outcome fairness and procedural fairness.Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2015 Jan;41(1):19-34. doi: 10.1177/0146167214556237. Epub 2014 Nov 11. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2015. PMID: 25387762 Clinical Trial.
-
An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: interactive effects of outcomes and procedures.Psychol Bull. 1996 Sep;120(2):189-208. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.120.2.189. Psychol Bull. 1996. PMID: 8831296 Review.
-
Fairness and wellness incentives: what is the relevance of the process-outcome distinction?Prev Med. 2012 Nov;55 Suppl:S118-23. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.03.005. Epub 2012 Mar 16. Prev Med. 2012. PMID: 22449482 Review.
Cited by
-
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.
-
Rationalism or Intuitionism: How Does Internet Use Affect the Perceptions of Social Fairness among Middle-Aged Groups in China?Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Aug 10;19(16):9855. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19169855. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36011492 Free PMC article.
-
Does Internet Connect to Social Justice Perception in China?Front Psychol. 2022 Jun 10;13:917039. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.917039. eCollection 2022. Front Psychol. 2022. PMID: 35756292 Free PMC article.
-
Data-Driven Discrimination, Perceived Fairness, and Consumer Trust-The Perspective of Consumer Attribution.Front Psychol. 2021 Sep 30;12:748765. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.748765. eCollection 2021. Front Psychol. 2021. PMID: 34659067 Free PMC article.
-
Artificial fairness? Trust in algorithmic police decision-making.J Exp Criminol. 2023;19(1):165-189. doi: 10.1007/s11292-021-09484-9. Epub 2021 Sep 12. J Exp Criminol. 2023. PMID: 34539294 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
