IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v115y2011i2p268-282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effects of managerial regulatory fit priming on reactions to explanations

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Andrew
  • Evans, Joel
  • Christian, Michael S.
  • Gilliland, Stephen W.
  • Kausel, Edgar E.
  • Stein, Jordan H.

Abstract

We investigated the interactive effects of regulatory focus priming and message framing on the perceived fairness of unfavorable events. We hypothesized that individuals' perceptions of fairness are higher when they receive a regulatory focus prime (promotion versus prevention) that is congruent with the framing of an explanation (gain versus loss), as opposed to one that is incongruent. We also hypothesized that these effects are mediated by counterfactual thinking. Three studies revealed that primed regulatory fit (promotion/gain or prevention/loss) led to higher levels of justice perceptions than regulatory misfit (promotion/loss or prevention/gain). Additionally, "could" and "should" counterfactuals partially mediated the relationship between regulatory fit and interactional justice (Study 3).

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Andrew & Evans, Joel & Christian, Michael S. & Gilliland, Stephen W. & Kausel, Edgar E. & Stein, Jordan H., 2011. "The effects of managerial regulatory fit priming on reactions to explanations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 268-282, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:115:y:2011:i:2:p:268-282
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597811000173
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Turillo, Carmelo Joseph & Folger, Robert & Lavelle, James J. & Umphress, Elizabeth E. & Gee, Julie O., 2002. "Is virtue its own reward? Self-sacrificial decisions for the sake of fairness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 839-865, September.
    2. Holler, Marianne & Hoelzl, Erik & Kirchler, Erich & Leder, Susanne & Mannetti, Lucia, 2008. "Framing of information on the use of public finances, regulatory fit of recipients and tax compliance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 597-611, August.
    3. Cropanzano, Russell & Paddock, Layne & Rupp, Deborah E. & Bagger, Jessica & Baldwin, Amanda, 2008. "How regulatory focus impacts the process-by-outcome interaction for perceived fairness and emotions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 36-51, January.
    4. Horvath, Michael & Ryan, Ann Marie & Stierwalt, Sandra L., 2000. "The Influence of Explanations for Selection Test Use, Outcome Favorability, and Self-Efficacy on Test-Taker Perceptions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 310-330, November.
    5. Lind, E. Allan & Kray, Laura & Thompson, Leigh, 1998. "The Social Construction of Injustice: Fairness Judgments in Response to Own and Others' Unfair Treatment by Authorities, , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 1-22, July.
    6. Jiewen Hong & Angela Y. Lee, 2008. "Be Fit and Be Strong: Mastering Self-Regulation through Regulatory Fit," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(5), pages 682-695, August.
    7. Aaker, Jennifer L. & Lee, Angela Y., 2006. "Understanding Regulatory Fit," Research Papers 1910, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    8. Aaker, Jennifer L & Lee, Angela Y, 2001. ""I" Seek Pleasures and "We" Avoid Pains: The Role of Self-Regulatory Goals in Information Processing and Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 33-49, June.
    9. Brockner, Joel & Higgins, E. Tory, 2001. "Regulatory Focus Theory: Implications for the Study of Emotions at Work," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 35-66, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kanfer, Ruth & Chen, Gilad, 2016. "Motivation in organizational behavior: History, advances and prospects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 6-19.
    2. Venus, Merlijn & Stam, Daan & van Knippenberg, Daan, 2013. "Leader emotion as a catalyst of effective leader communication of visions, value-laden messages, and goals," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 53-68.
    3. Ganegoda, Deshani B. & Folger, Robert, 2015. "Framing effects in justice perceptions: Prospect theory and counterfactuals," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 27-36.
    4. Burris, Ethan R. & Martins, Luis L. & Kimmons, Yurianna, 2022. "Mixed Messages: Why managers (do not) endorse employee voice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    5. Dorit Efrat-Treister & Hadar Moriah & Anat Rafaeli, 2020. "The effect of waiting on aggressive tendencies toward emergency department staff: Providing information can help but may also backfire," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xiaomei Wang & Lin Zhang & Xiaoyu Jiang & Jia Wang, 2021. "Promoting Water Conservation Based on the Matching Effect of Regulatory Focus and Emotion," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Leder, Susanne & Mannetti, Lucia & Hölzl, Erik & Kirchler, Erich, 2010. "Regulatory fit effects on perceived fiscal exchange and tax compliance," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 271-277, April.
    3. Zou, Lili Wenli & Chan, Ricky Y.K., 2019. "Why and when do consumers perform green behaviors? An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 113-127.
    4. Lucia Mannetti & Ambra Brizi & Mauro Giacomantonio & E Tory Higgins, 2013. "Framing Political Messages to Fit the Audience’s Regulatory Orientation: How to Improve the Efficacy of the Same Message Content," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-1, October.
    5. Cheng, Yin-Hui & Yen, HsiuJu Rebecca & Chuang, Shih-Chieh & Chang, Chia-Jung, 2013. "Product option framing under the influence of a promotion versus prevention focus," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 402-413.
    6. Cropanzano, Russell & Paddock, Layne & Rupp, Deborah E. & Bagger, Jessica & Baldwin, Amanda, 2008. "How regulatory focus impacts the process-by-outcome interaction for perceived fairness and emotions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 36-51, January.
    7. Florack, Arnd & Keller, Johannes & Palcu, Johanna, 2013. "Regulatory focus in economic contexts," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 127-137.
    8. Ying Hua & Shuang (Sara) Ma & Yonggui Wang & Qimeng Wan, 2017. "To reward or develop identification in online brand communities: evidence from emerging markets," Information Technology for Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 579-596, July.
    9. Pablo Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara & Miguel Suárez-Acosta, 2014. "Employees’ Reactions to Peers’ Unfair Treatment by Supervisors: The Role of Ethical Leadership," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 122(4), pages 537-549, July.
    10. Nithima Sumpradit & Richard P. Bagozzi & Frank J. Ascione, 2015. "“Give Me Happiness” or “Take Away My Pain”: Explaining consumer responses to prescription drug advertising," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1024926-102, December.
    11. Alden, Dana L. & Friend, John & Schapira, Marilyn & Stiggelbout, Anne, 2014. "Cultural targeting and tailoring of shared decision making technology: A theoretical framework for improving the effectiveness of patient decision aids in culturally diverse groups," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 1-8.
    12. Price, Kenneth H. & Lavelle, James J. & Henley, Amy B. & Cocchiara, Faye K. & Buchanan, F. Robert, 2006. "Judging the fairness of voice-based participation across multiple and interrelated stages of decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 212-226, March.
    13. Whitson, Jennifer A. & Wang, Cynthia S. & See, Ya Hui Michelle & Baker, Wayne E. & Murnighan, J. Keith, 2015. "How, when, and why recipients and observers reward good deeds and punish bad deeds," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 84-95.
    14. Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara, Pablo & Aguiar-Quintana, Teresa & Suárez-Acosta, Miguel A., 2013. "A justice framework for understanding how guests react to hotel employee (mis)treatment," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 143-152.
    15. Kanfer, Ruth & Chen, Gilad, 2016. "Motivation in organizational behavior: History, advances and prospects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 6-19.
    16. Franck Biétry & Jordane Creusier, 2018. "An instrumental and relational explanation of witness reactions to interactional injustice in the workplace: The case of inter-peer derogation [Une explication instrumentale et relationnelle de la ," Post-Print hal-01884082, HAL.
    17. Ambrose, Maureen L., 2002. "Contemporary justice research: A new look at familiar questions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 803-812, September.
    18. Shavitt, Sharon & Barnes, Aaron J., 2020. "Culture and the Consumer Journey," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 40-54.
    19. Pierro, Antonio & Giacomantonio, Mauro & Pica, Gennaro & Mannetti, Lucia & Kruglanski, Arie W. & Tory Higgins, E., 2013. "When comparative ads are more effective: Fit with audience’s regulatory mode," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 90-103.
    20. Lagomarsino, Maria & Lemarié, Linda & Puntiroli, Michael, 2020. "When saving the planet is worth more than avoiding destruction: The importance of message framing when speaking to egoistic individuals," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 162-176.

    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:eee:jobhdp:v:115:y:2011:i:2:p:268-282. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    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.