The effects of managerial regulatory fit priming on reactions to explanations
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).
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 115 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (July)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Aaker, Jennifer L. & Lee, Angela Y., 2006. "Understanding Regulatory Fit," Research Papers 1910, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Jiewen Hong & Angela Y. Lee, 2008. "Be Fit and Be Strong: Mastering Self-Regulation through Regulatory Fit," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(5), pages 682-695, 08.
- 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.
- 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.
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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.