Are Outcome Fairness and Outcome Favorability Distinguishable Psychological Constructs? A Meta-Analytic Review

191 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Organizational justice and extrarole customer service: The mediating role of well-being at work (2008, background): “In a third metaanalysis, Skitka, Winquist, and Hutchinson (2003) found that distributive and procedural justice were each related to citizenship behaviours, although they did not investigate the effects of interactional justice.”
Justice at the millennium, a decade later: a meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives. (2013, methodology): “Consistent with Skitka et al. (2003), we did not use outcome favorability as an indicator of distributive justice, focusing instead on equity-based measures.”
BACKLASH TOWARD DIVERSITY INITIATIVES: EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF DIVERSITY PROGRAM JUSTIFICATION, PERSONAL AND GROUP OUTCOMES (2004, background): “While prior research in the justice literature has shown that outcomes shape people’s percep- tions of procedural fairness (Skitka et al., 2003), our study demonstrates that there are other important affective and cognitive attitudinal responses.”
Keep it local and fish-friendly: Social acceptance of hydropower projects in Switzerland (2017, background): “The three most prominent principles are equity, equality and need [54,62].”