Justice for all? Progress in Research on Cultural Variation in the Psychology of Distributive and Procedural Justice

Abstract

Nous passons en revue les apports des recherches concernant l'impact de la culture sur la perception de la justice. Nous pre sentons les modeÁ les qui rendent compte de la facË on dont les gens appre cient l'e quite de l'attribution des allocations d'une part, l'e quite des processus de de cision d'autre part. Suite aÁ l'examen de recherches interculturelles, nous prenons en conside ration des diffe rences entre pays pour mettre aÁ l'e preuve des hypotheÁ ses sur les liens entre des valeurs culturelles ge ne rales (ex.: individualisme-collectivisme) et des criteÁ res particuliers (ex. les reÁ gles d'e quite ). Nous ne manquons pas toutefois de souligner les e cueils que rencontre cette strate gie de recherche qui a entraõà ne une meilleure pre cision des conceptions de l'influence culturelle (pre cision dans les valeurs, les contextes sociaux qui renvoient aÁ des criteÁ res d'e quite particuliers et les structures de savoirs qui pre sident aÁ l'interpre tation des conduites).We review progress in research attempting to model the influence of culture on judgments of justice. We review research on people's reactions to resource allocation outcomes (the psychology of distributive justice), as well as on people's reactions to the processes through which authorities make decisions (the psychology of procedural justice). We describe the progress from early work in which culture was equated with country differences to later work which focused on dimensions of values (e.g. individualism±collectivism) that mediate country differences and important contextual factors (e.g. in-group versus out-group) that moderate them. Yet we also describe pitfalls of this research strategy. Finally, we describe a recent trend toward greater specificity in conceptions of cultural influenceÐmore specific value-dimensions, more specific contextual factors, and the inclusion of specific knowledge structures.

Perceptions of justice and organisational commitment in international mergers and acquisitions

“…This is because what is considered "just and legitimate" differs across cultures (Lakshman, 2011;Morris & Leung, 2000). Also, the antecedents of justice and perception of fairness vary across cultures (Drori et al, 2011;Hundley & Kim, 1997).…”

VOICE, CONTROL, AND BELONGING: The Double-Edged Sword of Procedural Fairness

“…Cross-national psychological differences can be difficult to interpret, because of considerable within-nation variability and the likely confounding influences of economics, education, socialization, language, and response biases. Morris and Leung (2000) argued for that procedural justice researchers should directly assess important cultural differences at the individual level. For example, Brockner and colleagues (Brockner, Chen, Mannix, Leung, & Skarlicki, 2000) conducted negotiation simulations in the People's Republic of China and in the US.…”

The Mediating Role of Procedural Justice in Responses to Promotion Decisions

“…However, in traditional sectors such as the textile and chemical sectors investigated in our research, career advancement is still conceived as a progression in the organizational hierarchy, which is important in Italy (Hofstede, 1980). Cross-cultural research on procedural justice has been quite limited (Morris & Leung, 2000); however, those studies investigating justice concepts across cultures have primarily involved Asian samples (McFarlin & Sweeney, 2001;Morris, Leung, Ames, & Lickel, 1999). As such, current thinking regarding the meaning of justice and subsequent reactions to organizational justice may not generalize to employees from societies that have cultural and/or economic characteristics that differ from those commonly found in North American and Asian societies.…”