Tina L. Robbins

Short Research Note: Using the group-value model to explain the role of noninstrumental justice in distinguishing the effects of distributive and procedural justice

The purpose of this study was to distinguish the effects of distributive, instrumental procedural, and noninstrumental (i.e. group-value effects) procedural justice in a field study. As predicted by the group-value model (Lind & Tyler, 1988), noninstrumental procedural justice captured unique variance in organizational commitment, turnover intentions, as well as both individual and group performance. Furthermore, noninstrumental justice explained more unique variance in commitment and performance than did distributive justice or instrumental procedural justice. These findings provide a greater understanding of why procedural justice, as a whole, has been found to be more predictive of these outcomes in prior research.

Intra- and inter-justice relationships: Assessing the direction

This field study used structural equation modeling to investigate the relationships among: (1) distributive and procedural justice; (2) justice components and organizational commitment; and (3) justice components and behaviors/behavioral intentions. The results suggest that, over time, procedural justice judgments are likely to influence perceptions of distributive justice, but not vice versa. In addition, the results suggest that both distributive justice and procedural justice have reciprocal relationships with commitment and turnover intentions, although in some cases they are contingent on lagged effects. Relationships between procedural justice and behaviors (i.e. compliance, performance) were unidirectional, significant only in the justice-to-behavior direction.

Mood vs. Interpersonal Affect: Identifying Process and Rating Distortions in Performance Appraisal

This study was designed to simultaneously analyze the influence of mood and interpersonal affect on the performance appraisal process. Results suggest that affect consistency, as opposed to mood consistency, is likely to influence the weighting of recalled performance information and ratings subsequently assigned. Surprisingly, a mood-incongruent effect also occurred when weighting the performance information. Aside from affective influences, the raters assigned the most weight to positive performance incidents, however, the raters remembered more of the negative performance. Implications for appraisal practice and directions for future research are discussed.

Social loafing on cognitive tasks: An examination of the “sucker effect”

This study addresses the causes and potential mediators of social loafing on tasks which require active cognitive effort. Contrary to previous research, social loafing did occur despite the use of a task which was thought-provoking, personally involving, and provided the opportunity for unique contributions. The results suggest that equity theory, which has been supported as a reason for social loafing on physical tasks, may also be the basis for loafing on cognitive tasks. No significant loafing occurred when the subjects believed their partners would not loaf.

Moderators of Sex Bias in the Performance Appraisal Process: A Cognitive Analysis

The present study was designed to analyze cognitive characteristics and situational moderators associated with sex bias in performance appraisal. The results of this study suggest that sex bias does not emerge as an influential factor during rater recall. Ratees performing in sex-incongruent occupations were found to receive deflated ratings in situations where their gender was not distinct within the group of ratees to be evaluated. Interpretations, limitations, implications, and directions for future research are discussed.

Correlates of Team Success in Higher Education

(2001). Correlates of Team Success in Higher Education. The Journal of Social Psychology: Vol. 141, No. 1, pp. 135-136.

Practising what we preach: justice and ethical instruction in management education

Building on organizational justice research, we extended the study of classroom justice to management education. In the first study, we identified the criteria that business students use to define distributive, procedural, and interactional fairness. In a second study, we found that management students’ perceptions of both procedural and interactional fairness were significant and unique predictors of their evaluations of instructional effectiveness. However, procedural justice was the only significant predictor of overall evaluations of the course. Results of this study will aid management educators in implementing procedures and treatment that students perceive as fair and also to serve as ethical role models for managers of the future.