Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2018
-
(2018): Ranking low, feeling high. How hierarchical position and experienced power promote prosocial behavior in response to procedural justice. In: The Journal of applied psychology 103 (2), S. 164-181. DOI: 10.1037/apl0000260
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28933910 Abstract: Research shows that power can lead to prosocial behavior by facilitating the behavioral expression of dispositional prosocial motivation. However, it is not clear how power may facilitate responses to contextual factors that promote prosocial motivation. Integrating fairness heuristic theory and the situated focus theory of power, we argue that in particular, organization members in lower (vs. higher) hierarchical positions who simultaneously experience a high (vs. low) sense of power respond with prosocial behavior to 1 important antecedent of prosocial motivation, that is, the enactment of procedural justice. The results from a multisource survey among employees and their leaders from various organizations (Study 1) and an experiment using a public goods dilemma (Study 2) support this prediction. Three subsequent experiments (Studies 3-5) show that this effect is mediated by perceptions of authority trustworthiness. Taken together, this research (a) helps resolve the debate regarding whether power promotes or undermines prosocial behavior, (b) demonstrates that hierarchical position and the sense of power can have very different effects on processes that are vital to the functioning of an organization, and (c) helps solve ambiguity regarding the roles of hierarchical position and power in fairness heuristic theory. (PsycINFO Database Record
2017
-
(2017): Justice and Fairness in Negotiation. In: Group Decision and Negotiation 26 (1), S. 9-17. DOI: 10.1007/s10726-016-9496-4
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9496-4 Abstract: In this special issue we display a variety of approaches to the study of justice. Articles from scholars working on questions involving justice and fairness in decision making exchanges calls attention to a variety of research approaches, issue domains, cases and hypotheses used to explore these questions. All of the contributions emphasize analysis, using quantitative and qualitative methods including simulation-experiments, comparative case studies, statistical analyses and game theory. The articles in this collection reveal that justice and fairness concerns extend from the negotiation process to the outcome and into the implementation stage. They share the underlying expectation that individuals and groups gravitate toward fairness and justice in their exchanges with others. Therefore, a full understanding of group decision processes will be incomplete if justice and fairness issues are not considered alongside issues such as power distributions and alternatives to an agreeme nt. The authors also suggest that outcomes built on justice and fairness principles will enhance the efficiency, stability and implementation of the negotiated agreements. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
2015
-
(2015): “Justice” and “fairness” are not the same thing. In: Journal of Organizational Behavior 36 (2), S. 313-318. DOI: 10.1002/job.1956
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1956 Abstract: Organizational justice researchers tend to treat as synonyms the terms 'justice' and 'fairness'. We discuss different definitional arguments, concluding that these two concepts are distinct. Justice should be defined as adherence to rules of conduct, whereas fairness should be defined as individuals' moral evaluations of this conduct. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
2011
-
(2011) : Motive fairen und nicht-solidarischen Verhaltens: Korruption: Forschungsstand, Prävention, Probleme: Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers
Abstract: Ausgehend von der Feststellung, dass sich die Psychologie bisher wenig mit dem Thema "Korruption" auseinandergesetzt hat, werden mogliche psychologische Beitrage zu einer Korruptionsforschung besprochen. Dabei werden psychologische Theorien und Forschungsergebnisse zu "Gerechtigkeit und Fairness" (Organisationsgerechtigkeit als theoretische Basis; distributive Gerechtigkeit bzw. Fairness; prozedurale Fairness; Interaktionsfairness) sowie zu "Fairness und Teameffizienz" dargestellt. Im Rahmen des zuletzt genannten Punktes wird uber eine Studie berichtet, in der das Gerechtigkeitserleben bei der Teamarbeit untersucht wurde. Es zeigte sich unter anderem, dass die Grundeinstellung zu einer Aufgabe ausschlaggebend dafur ist, inwieweit jemand eine Teamarbeit akzeptiert und effizient im Team arbeitet. Die realen vorhandenen Arbeitsbedingungen, sowie die Art und Weise der Aufgabenverteilung (Losverfahren) beeinflussen die Teameffizienz nicht. Fairness und "Social Loafing" sind dagegen starke Pradiktoren fur Teameffizienz. Je weniger Fairness vorhanden ist, desto weniger erfolgreich ist ein Team.
2006
-
(2006): Unfair treatment and revenge taking. The roles of collective identification and feelings of disappointment. In: Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 10 (3), S. 220-232. DOI: 10.1037/1089-2699.10.3.220
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.10.3.220 Abstract: In the present research, we examine how procedural justice predicts acts of revenge as a function of members' sense of collective identification. A first scenario study showed that high identifiers expect their own group to be more fair and just than low identifiers, and if this is not the case, they exhibit higher levels of disappointment. A second scenario study showed that unfair procedures (relative to fair procedures) led to acts of revenge, but mainly so when collective identification was high rather than low. In addition, the level of disappointment that members experienced was found to mediate (at least partly) this interactive effect on revenge. A third laboratory study replicated the interactive finding of Study 2. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) zitiert von 57
- <<
- <
- 1