Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments.

By K. van den Bos, E. Lind. 2002

893 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, General Decision Sciences, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7a46c4f235e022d97ceca00d0cfc9e2bbf51d56f

How researchers see this paper

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

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In General Decision Sciences

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

The Impact of Authoritarian Leadership on Ethical Voice: A Moderated Mediation Model of Felt Uncertainty and Leader Benevolence (2019, background): “We draw upon uncertainty management theory (Lind and Van den Bos 2002; Van den Bos and Lind 2002) to explain how authoritarian leaders affect employee ethical voice.”
When does procedural fairness promote organizational citizenship behavior? Integrating empowering leadership types in relational justice models (2012, result): “This idea is directly in line with uncertainty management theory, which notes that people who experience high levels of uncertainty are relatively more sensitive to the fairness of the enacted procedures (Lind & Van den Bos, 2002; van den Bos & Lind, 2002).”
Why inconsistent leadership is regarded as procedurally unfair: the importance of social self‐esteem concerns (2003, methodology): “Following fairness heuristic theory (see Lind, 2001; Van den Bos & Lind, 2002), the relational component of procedures (influencing self and emotions) is expected to be Copyright # 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Eur.”
Experimental research on just-world theory: problems, developments, and future challenges. (2005, background): “Van den Bos’s (2001; van den Bos & Lind, 2002) interpretation of these data was again that feelings and thoughts of uncertainty—in this case, uncertainty related to one’s own mortality—increased the importance of fairness, and therefore the extent to which information about fairness influenced…”
In justice we trust: Exploring knowledge-sharing continuance intentions in virtual communities of practice (2010, background): “According to uncertainty management theory, justice is imperative for people because justice judgments are an effective and readily available mechanism for managing the diverse uncertain circumstances (Van den Bos & Lind, 2002) which typify the virtual context.”
Organizational justice: New insights from behavioural ethics (2013, background): “Uncertainty management theory grew from this seminal work (Van den Bos and Lind, 2002).”
Moderating effects of job insecurity in the relationships between procedural justice and employee well-being: Gender differences (2005, background): “In this article we explore the moderating role of perceived job insecurity in the association between perceived procedural justice and employee well-being, thus extending and testing the predictions of the uncertainty management model (van den Bos & Lind, 2002).”
Self-uncertainty and responsiveness to procedural justice (2005, methodology): “Our findings align well with recent research suggesting that uncertainty underlies reactions to information about fairness of procedure (Van den Bos, 2001b; Van den Bos & Lind, 2002).”
Revisiting How and When Perceived Organizational Support Enhances Taking Charge (2015, background): “Second and similarly, when employees are more uncertain about the stability of their work structures, they tend to be more preoccupied with how fairly treated they are (Lind & van den Bos, 2002; van den Bos, 2001; van den Bos & Lind, 2002).”
The Group Engagement Model: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Cooperative Behavior (2003, background): “…focused on showing that justice matters, that is, on demonstrating that people’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are shaped by their justice judgments, suggesting that information about justice is central to people’s evaluations of social situations (Tyler et al., 1997; van den Bos & Lind, 2002).”
On preferences and doing the right thing: Satisfaction with advantageous inequity when cognitive processing is limited (2006, background): “Quite the contrary, we work from the assumption that fairness is frequently a very real concern to people ( Van den Bos & Lind, 2002; see also Miller & Ratner, 1998).”