What constitutes fairness in work settings? A four-component model of procedural justice

By Steven L. Blader, Tom Tyler. 2003

218 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b54e0c0d9fbec7d4303cfbbe824ed6943aca5886

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Determinants of employee turnover intention: Understanding the roles of organizational justice, supervisory justice, authoritarian organizational culture and organization-employee relationship quality (2017, background): “Organization-employee relationship quality and turnover intention Blader and Tyler (2003) suggested that individuals’ evaluation of fairness provide a cue regarding their relationship with their organizations.”
WHY DO MANAGERS ACT FAIRLY IN THE FIRST PLACE? A DAILY INVESTIGATION OF "HOT" AND "COLD" MOTIVES AND DISCRETION (2014, background): “Finally, in terms of the distinction between “exchanges,” which are more formal, and “encounters,” which are more informal (Blader & Tyler, 2003), work on moral judgment suggests that impersonal situations elicit more cognitively based decisions and behaviors, while more informal situations…”
Testing and extending the group engagement model: linkages between social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes, and extrarole behavior. (2009, unknown): “…evaluations of the fairness of decision-making processes and the quality of treatment (referred to by some researchers as interactional justice; cf. Blader & Tyler, 2003a, 2003b) have a strong influence on employee behavior (Blader & Tyler, 2005; Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt, Conlon,…”
Justice, Trust, and Trustworthiness: A Longitudinal Analysis Integrating Three Theoretical Perspectives (2011, background): “The relationship between justice and trust has most often been described using social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), which summarizes how the transactions in an exchange relationship evolve and change over time. Conceptualizations of exchange theory have stressed that a number of resources can be inv”
Explaining The Efficacy of Counterfactually-Augmented Data (2020, background): “Concerns about bias in algorithms stem in part from principles of procedural fairness (Blader & Tyler, 2003; Miller, 2017; Grgic-Hlaca et al., 2018; Lipton et al., 2018).”
Justice at the millennium, a decade later: a meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives. (2013, background): “Drawing on Byrne (1999), Rupp and Cropanzano noted that all justice dimensions could be referenced to either formal organizational systems or informal aspects of a supervisor’s leadership style (see also Blader & Tyler, 2003b; Colquitt, 2001).”
Measuring Procedural Justice in Police-Citizen Encounters (2015, methodology): “We do not address formal procedural justice, which refers to the degree to which agents comply with official rules and procedures (Blader & Tyler, 2003).”
How the Perceptions of Five Dimensions of Corporate Citizenship and Their Inter-Inconsistencies Predict Affective Commitment (2010, background): “Additionally, organizations that are perceived as fair communicate to employees that the organization values them, thus making them feel good about both themselves and the company (Blader and Tyler, 2003; Meyer et al., 2002).”
The Group Engagement Model: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Cooperative Behavior (2003, background): “By combining the distinction between formal and informal sources of justice with the distinction between decision making and treatment concerns, we arrive at a four-component model of procedural justice (Blader & Tyler, 2003a, 2003b; Tyler & Blader, 2000).”
Victims’ experiences in the criminal justice system and their recovery from crime (2013, background): “Determinants of procedural justice judgments that are found in the literature include the quality of victims’ interactions with authorities and the quality of procedures (Blader and Tyler, 2003; Brockner et al., 1994; Tyler, 2000; Tyler and Bies, 1990; Tyler and Lind, 1992; Wemmers, 1996).”