Exploring the Role of Emotions in Injustice Perceptions and Retaliation.

Barclay, Laurie J.; Skarlicki, Daniel P.; Pugh, S. Douglas

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.629

Cited by 450 publications

(460 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

400

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings of Van den Bos are important because they support the ideas that (a) justice is in the eye of the beholder and thus subject to people's subjective and affective experiences (see also Barclay et al 2005;De Cremer 2007), and (b) mood impacts on fairness judgments under specific circumstances (i.e. when uncertainty about fairness information is high).…”

supporting

confidence: 54%

Procedural justice effects on self-esteem under certainty versus uncertainty emotions

Cremer

Hiel

2008

Motiv Emot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building upon the idea that procedural justice effects are more pronounced when uncertainty is high, we proposed that recall of an uncertainty-eliciting emotion (fear) will render people more responsive to variations in procedural justice than will recall of a certainty-eliciting emotion (disgust). Results from Study 1, (n = 79 undergraduate students) confirmed that a fair procedure (voice condition) enhanced self-esteem relative to an unfair procedure (no voice condition) to a greater extent when people recalled fear than when they recalled disgust. Results from Study 2 (n = 147 undergraduate students) also showed that a fair, relative to an unfair, procedure enhanced self-esteem more strongly when recalling the emotion of fear rather than disgust, but only when these emotions were recalled from a self-immersed than a self-distanced perspective. These findings confirm that discrete emotions that orient people to interpret situations in uncertain versus certain ways are important antecedents of procedural justice effects.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 54%

Procedural justice effects on self-esteem under certainty versus uncertainty emotions

Cremer

Hiel

2008

Motiv Emot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…111)." It appears, then, that researchers lack a clear understanding of when perceived unfairness translates into retaliation and why unfairness recipients pursue or inhibit retaliation.Some justice research has looked into affect as an explanation for the inconsistent relation between unfair treatment and retaliation (Barclay, Skarlicki, & Pugh, 2005;Bembenek et al, 2007;Bies & Tripp, 1996;De Cremer, 2007). This research has shown that negative emotions (e.g., anger, disappointment) accompany retaliation as a response to perceived unfairness, but the research has not addressed when and why people sometimes pursue and sometimes inhibit retaliation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Retaliation as a response to procedural unfairness: A self-regulatory approach.

Brebels¹,

Cremer²,

Sedikides³

2008

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When does procedural unfairness result in retaliation, and why do unfair-treatment recipients sometimes pursue and other times inhibit retaliation? Five studies addressed these questions. We proposed and found that regulatory focus moderates retaliation against an unfairness-enacting authority: Promotion-focus participants were more likely to retaliate than prevention-focus participants. Promotion focus was associated with, and also heightened the accessibility of, the individual self. In turn, individual-self accessibility influenced retaliation. In fact, preventionfocus participants were as retaliatory as promotion-focus participants under conditions of high individual-self accessibility. Implications for the procedural fairness and regulatory focus literatures are discussed and suggestions for future research are offered.Keywords: retaliation, unfair treatment, procedural fairness, regulatory focus, self-activation This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record.Unfair Treatment, Retaliation, and Self-Regulation 3 Retaliation as a Response to Procedural Unfairness: A Self-Regulatory ApproachFor many people, unfair treatment in group or organizational settings is a recurrent experience; it is also an aversive experience (Mikula, 1986;Miller, 2001;Oyserman, Uskul, Yoder, Nesse, & Williams, 2007). Aversion would be expected to result in retaliation (e.g., revenge, stealing, antisocial resource allocation). Indeed, justice researchers have considered perceived unfairness a key predictor of retaliation in employee-supervisor relationships, and they have carried out field studies to test this idea (Aquino, Tripp, & Bies, 2001;Barclay, Skarlicki, & Pugh, 2005;Bies, Tripp, & Kramer, 1997;Blader, Chang, & Tyler, 2001;Giacalone & Greenberg, 1997;Greenberg, 1993;Skarlicki & Folger, 1997). When these studies were metaanalyzed (Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, & Ng, 2001), however, a rather surprising conclusion emerged: perceived unfairness was an inconsistent predictor of retaliation. This conclusion was echoed by subsequent bodies of research (Bembenek, Beike, & Schroeder, 2007; Colquitt, Scott, Judge, & Shaw, 2006;Posthuma, Maertz, & Dworkin, 2007). In the words of Colquitt et al. (2006), "a substantial amount of variation exists in these relationships, and … moderators could explain much of that variation (p. 111)." It appears, then, that researchers lack a clear understanding of when perceived unfairness translates into retaliation and why unfairness recipients pursue or inhibit retaliation.Some justice research has looked into affect as an explanation for the inconsistent relation between unfair treatment and retaliation (Barclay, Skarlicki, & Pugh, 2005;Bembenek et al., 2007;Bies & Tripp, 1996;De Cremer, 2007). This research has shown that negative emotions (e.g., anger, disappointment) accompany retaliation as a response to perceived unfairness, but the research has not addressed when and why people sometimes pursue and sometimes inhi...

show abstract

“…No entanto, a injustiça parece conter mais intensamente aspectos emocionais visto que ela é freqüentemente associada ou considerada como um sentimento (Barclay, Skarlicki & Pugh, 2005;Weiss, Suckow & Cropanzano, 1999). Neste sentido pressupomos que há uma assimetria na intensidade dos componentes afetivos entre as representações sociais da justiça e injustiça.…”

Section: Organização Afetiva Das Representações Sociaisunclassified

“…No entanto supõe-se que a L. Spadoni injustiça é mais intensamente afetiva do que a justiça a ponto de ser considerada por alguns autores da psicologia como um sentimento (Barclay, Skarlicki & Pugh, 2005;Weiss, Suckow & Cropanzano,1999).…”

unclassified

Aspectos afetivos da justiça e injustiça e assimetrias entre temas

Spadoni

2011

Psic.: Teor. e Pesq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMO -Neste artigo abordam-se os aspectos afetivos das representações sociais organizadas em tematas para demonstrar que a oposição entre a justiça e a injustiça possui uma organização marcada por simetrias e assimetrias. Para isso foram testadas duas hipóteses baseadas na perspectiva estruturalista das representações sociais. A primeira hipótese conjetura que esta dupla de representações possui uma ancoragem de emoções organizadas simetricamente. A segunda hipótese pressupõe que a injustiça tem sua organização marcada por uma maior intensidade afetiva do que a justiça. Os dados advindos de uma manipulação quasi-experimental com alunos de psicologia de Paris confirmam as duas hipóteses. Existem palavras ou expressões tais como corrupção que provocam sentimentos de injustiça. Esses sentimentos nos parecem, num primeiro momento sem um conteúdo lógico e racional. Ou seja, não precisamos construir um raciocínio lógico ou uma argumentação antes de concluirmos intuitivamente que uma situação é injusta. PalavrasEsse aspecto afetivo e pouco racional de alguns elementos do pensamento social foi descrito por Rouquette (1988) através de um conceito nomeado de "nexus". Os nexus são nódulos pré-lógicos com forte carga afetiva que provocam uma forte e rápida aceitação ou rejeição de um objeto social antes mesmo que os aspectos cognitivos sejam acionados. Por isso os nexus dão a impressão de serem vazios de sentido. Se pedirmos às pessoas que definam certos termos como "Liberdade" ou "Justiça", é possível que elas encontrem dificuldade, pois esses termos parecem ser conhecimentos evidentes, mas difíceis de explicar.Num primeiro estudo realizado sobre o conceito de nexus, Rouquette (1994) demonstrou que as proposições do partido político de Hitler foram mais aceitas quando elas foram expostas enquanto proposições do partido nacional socialista do que quando elas foram expostas enquanto propostas do partido nazista. A presença da expressão "nazista" na apresentação da proposta causou uma forte rejeição que pareceu ser independente do conteúdo das propostas.Num segundo estudo, Campos e Rouquette (2000) compararam as evocações feitas a partir de dois termos: Brasil e Senna. O estudo foi realizado na época da morte trágica do piloto de fórmula 1 e por isso o nome do piloto "Senna" possuía uma forte conotação afetiva, o quê provocou evocações mais consensuais do que o termo "Brasil".A partir desses dois primeiros estudos, vieram outros que esclareceram novos aspectos sobre o conceito de nexus. Lo Monaco, Rateau e Guimelli, (2007) demonstraram que os nexus tendem a apagar as diferenças intergrupais. Wolter e Rouquette (2006) demonstraram que os nexus mobilizam as pessoas a adotar comportamentos de ajuda solidária. Os questionários com o termo "Tsunami" obtiveram mais intenções de ajuda do que os questionários com o termo "catástrofe natural".É importante ressaltar que a teoria sobre os nexus se insere na perspectiva estruturalista das representações sociais. O nexus pode ser considerado como uma alteração dos componentes afetivos d...

show abstract

Exploring the Role of Emotions in Injustice Perceptions and Retaliation.

Cited by 450 publications

References 57 publications

Procedural justice effects on self-esteem under certainty versus uncertainty emotions

Procedural justice effects on self-esteem under certainty versus uncertainty emotions

Retaliation as a response to procedural unfairness: A self-regulatory approach.

Aspectos afetivos da justiça e injustiça e assimetrias entre temas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About