Internal standards revisited: Effects of social comparisons and expectancies on judgments of fairness and satisfaction

Austin, William G.; McGinn, Neil C; Susmilch, Charles E.

doi:10.1016/0022-1031(80)90049-9

Cited by 128 publications

(120 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

107

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Earlier research on equity theory has shown that equitable outcomes usually evoke positive reactions, and that disadvantageous unequal outcomes mostly result in negative reactions (see, e.g., Austin et al, 1980;Austin and Walster, 1974;Buunk and Van Yperen, 1989;Van den Bos, 1999;Van den Bos et al, 1998). Interestingly, advantageous unequal outcomes are oftentimes also followed by negative reactions, although less strong as compared to disadvantageous arrangements.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Self-Threats on Fairness Judgments and Affective Measures

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the question of why fairness matters to people. Extending on terror and uncertainty management theories and the literature on the self, it is proposed here that fairness can be a means of self-defense. Thinking of a situation that is threatening to the self therefore should make fairness a more important issue to people. The findings of two experiments support this line of reasoning: Asking participants to think about things that are threatening to themselves led to stronger reactions to manipulations of both procedural and distributive fairness. In the discussion it is argued that these findings suggest that fairness especially matters to people when they are trying to deal with threats to their selves.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Self-Threats on Fairness Judgments and Affective Measures

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the basis of equity theory (e.g., Adams, 1965;Austin, McGinn, & Susmilch, 1980;Austin & Walster, 1974;Buunk & Van Yperen, 1989;Van den Bos, Lind, Vermunt, & Wilke, 1997), it can be argued that, when forming judgments of outcome satisfaction, individuals who are faced with inequity will feel distress and will be less satisfied than individuals who are confronted with equity. As noted by Adams (1965): ''There can be little doubt that inequity results in dissatisfaction'' (p. 283).…”

Section: Equity Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

When Fairness is Especially Important: Reactions to Being Inequitably Paid in Communal Relationships

Peters¹,

Bos

2008

Soc Just Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article focuses on when justice is especially important to people and, in doing so, explores the social conditions under which the importance of justice may change in social interactions. More specifically, the authors examine how different types of relationships affect evaluations of equitable and inequitable situations. It is argued that when people are confronted with friends as interaction partners, as opposed to unknown others, they are motivated to attend to the needs of their friends (Clark & Mills, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 12-24, 1979) and, therefore, they are not only concerned with their own outcomes, but also with their friends' outcomes. As predicted on the basis of this line of reasoning, two experiments demonstrate that when people's interaction partners are friends, people are indeed more satisfied with being underpaid and less satisfied with being overpaid compared to when their interaction partners are unknown others. In the discussion, it is argued that these findings suggest that justice is especially important to people when they are in communal relationships.

show abstract

“…Following earlier equity studies (e.g., Austin et al, 1980;Van den Bos et al, 1997, this paper studies people's reactions to being overpaid by exposing participants to situations in which there is another person who is comparable to participants with respect to the amount of input they have provided. The outcome that participants receive is held constant across conditions.…”

Section: How Do People Evaluate Overpayment?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the basis of equity theory (e.g., Adams, 1965;Austin et al, 1980;Austin and Walster, 1974;Buunk and Van Yperen, 1989;Van den Bos et al, 1997), it can be argued that, when forming judgments of outcome satisfaction, individuals who are faced with inequity will feel distress and will be less satisfied than individuals who are faced with equity. As noted by Adams (1965): "There can be little doubt that inequity results in dissatisfaction" (p. 283).…”

Section: How Do People Evaluate Overpayment?mentioning

confidence: 99%