An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcomes and procedures.

Abstract

The authors suggest that procedural and distributive factors interactively combine to influence individuals' reactions to their encounters with other people, groups, and organizations. Results from 45 independent samples (reviewed herein) show that (a) level of procedural justice is more positively related to individuals' reactions when outcome fairness or valence is relatively low and (b) level of outcome fairness or valence is more positively related to individuals' reactions when procedural justice is relatively low. They present various explanations of the interaction effect. Theoretical progress may be achieved through future efforts to delineate the conditions under which each of the explanations is more versus less likely to account for the interaction. Psychologists have long been interested in explaining individuals' reactions to their encounters with other people, groups, and organizations. Indeed, inquiry into this topic over the past 35 years has consisted of three major waves. The first wave of theory and research dealt with distributive issues, that is, the effects on individuals of the outcomes associated with their relationships or encounters. For example, social exchange theorists suggested that people react more favorably when the valence of the outcomes which they receive is relatively positive (Romans, 1961). Equity theory also provided a prominent outcome-oriented viewpoint. According to equity theorists, distributive justice-defined as the perceived proportion of individuals' inputs into and outcomes derived from the relationship in comparison with the inputs and outcomes of relevant others-shapes individuals' work motivation and job satisfaction The second wave of theory and research revealed that individuals' reactions also depend on the fairness of the procedures used by the other party to plan and implement resource allocation decisions. Most notably