Disagreeing about What's Fair: Exploring the Relationship between Perceptions of Justice and Employee Dissent

Kassing, Jeffrey W.; McDowell, Zachary J.

doi:10.1080/08824090701831784

Cited by 46 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Lateral dissent appears to be a function of a lack of openness demonstrated by high school coaches coupled with a lack of athletes' involvement. These findings closely resemble what happens in organizational settings, with lower ranking employees and those who perceive their organizations are intolerant of dissent expressing more lateral dissent (Kassing, 1998(Kassing, , 2000bKassing & Armstrong, 2001;Kassing & Avtgis, 1999;Kassing & McDowell, 2008). The implication being that high school coach-athlete relationships function more akin to superior-subordinate relationships than do college coach-athlete relationships.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Contradicting Coach or Grumbling to Teammates

Kassing

Anderson

2013

Communication & Sport

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to examine dissent expressed by athletes. Seventy-three former high school or college athletes from a variety of sports completed an online survey. Results indicated that athlete status and coaches' openness to feedback associated with upward dissent expressed to coaches. And that for high school coaches a lack of openness to athlete feedback and less time spent in a starting role associated with lateral dissent expressed to teammates. Overall the findings suggest that dissent functions similarly within the coach-athlete/sport context as it does within the superiorsubordinate/organizational context, particularly with regard to high school athletics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Contradicting Coach or Grumbling to Teammates

Kassing

Anderson

2013

Communication & Sport

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Displaced dissent was only associated negatively with perceptions of organizational influence and organizational commitment. Subsequent research has suggested that organizational dissent expression is a function of superiorÁsubordinate relationship quality (Kassing, 2000a), workplace freedom of speech (Kassing, 2000b), organizational burnout syndrome (Avtgis, Thomas-Maddox, Taylor, & Patterson, 2007), organizational tenure (Kassing & Dicioccio, 2004), perceptions of organizational justice (Goodboy, Chory, & Dunleavy, 2008;Kassing & McDowell, 2008), organization based self-esteem (Payne, 2007), and organizational climate and attachment (Kassing, 2008). Kassing and colleagues have revealed many pertinent findings on articulated, latent, and displaced targets of dissent and related correlates.…”

Section: Triggering Agentsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Instructional Dissent in the College Classroom

Goodboy¹

2011

Communication Education

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to (a) identify perceived triggering agents of student dissent in the college classroom, (b) determine common target receivers of dissent, and (c) reveal the types of dissent that students enact based on their intentional motives and construction of message content. Participants were 123 undergraduate students who completed a survey and provided multiple written narratives in response to open-ended questions. Results of a content analysis revealed that (a) common perceived triggering agents of dissent included (in rank order) unfair testing/assignments, unfair grading, and teaching style, followed by instructor offensiveness, policy, violating syllabus, instructor indolence, lack of feedback, and group members slacking; (b) target receivers of dissent were primarily the class professor, classmates, friends, and family members, among others; and (c) students engaged in three types of dissent including expressive dissent (i.e., to vent their feelings and frustrations), rhetorical dissent (i.e., to attempt to correct a perceived wrongdoing by the instructor), and vengeful dissent (i.e., to retaliate and ruin the reputation of an instructor).

show abstract

“…If working adults had not completed these measures, it is unlikely that we would have observed such results. Second, this method has successfully been used in previous studies (e.g., Chory & Westerman, 2009;Kassing & McDowell, 2008;Madlock, 2008). 364 S. M. Horan and R. M. Chory For example, directly contacted working adults and also had students recruit working adults.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 96%