Theoretical and cultural perspectives on organizational justice

87 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.

Escaping bullying: The simultaneous impact of individual and unit-level bullying on turnover intentions (2012, background): “…our theoretical arguments for the simultaneous and moderating impact of unit-level bullying on individual turnover intentions from the deontic model of justice and we characterize bullying as a violation of moral norms that can trigger deontic reactions (Folger, 1998, 2001; Folger et al., 2005).”
Different wrongs, different remedies? Reactions to organizational remedies after procedural and interactional injustice. (2006, background): “While the distinction between these two types of justice is now widely accepted (e.g., Bies, 2001; Bobocel & Holmvall, 2001), the range of their differences as well as the underlying social-psychological processes that may lead to different consequences are not well enough understood.”
Using Social Exchange Theory to Distinguish Procedural from Interactional Justice (2002, background): “Interactional and procedural justice were originally separate (e.g., Bies & Moag, 1986), then were combined (e.g., Tyler &Bies, 1990), and seem to bemoving apart once again (Bies, 2001; Bobocel & Holmvall, 1999, 2001; Malatesta & Byrne, 1997; Masterson et al., 2000; Moye et al., 1997).”