IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/xrs/sfbmaa/07-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Relying on accessibility experiences in procedural fairness judgments

Author

Listed:
  • Müller, Patrick A.

    (Department of Social and Organizational Psychology, Utrecht University)

  • Greifeneder, Rainer

    (Sonderforschungsbereich 504)

  • Stahlberg, Dagmar

    (Lehrstuhl fuer Sozialpsychologie, Sonderforschungsbereich 504)

  • Bless, Herbert

    (Mikrosoziologie und Sozialpsychologie Universität Mannheim)

Abstract

This paper presents empirical evidence corroborating the idea that procedural justice judgments are not only based on the accessible content information about the procedure, but also on accessibility experiences that accompany the accession of content about the procedure. Four experiments support the hypothesis that people judge a selection procedure in accordance with their subjective experiences of ease or difficulty, that is fairer, the more difficult the recall of unfair aspects felt. The influence of the accessibility experience on the procedural justice judgment is hereby moderated by dispositional self-uncertainty (Experiment 2), experimentally induced uncertainty (Experiment 3) and accuracy motivation (Experiment 4). Implications for the conceptualization of procedural justice judgments are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Müller, Patrick A. & Greifeneder, Rainer & Stahlberg, Dagmar & Bless, Herbert, 2007. "Relying on accessibility experiences in procedural fairness judgments," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 07-21, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    • Handle: RePEc:xrs:sfbmaa:07-21
    Note: This research was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMFT) within the framework of German-Israeli Project Cooperation (DIP) and by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft within the Sonderforschungsbereich 504 at the University of Mannheim.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:xrs:sfbmaa:07-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Carsten Schmidt (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfmande.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.