IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jtrust/v4y2014i2p147-166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cross-level effects of procedural justice perceptions on faculty trust

Author

Listed:
  • Maja Graso
  • Lixin Jiang
  • Tahira M. Probst
  • Wendi L. Benson

Abstract

The progression in the organisational justice literature has extended beyond the individual employee level towards recognising the importance of one's work unit and its potential to affect individual reactions to unfairness. This study contributes to existing multilevel justice research by assessing whether aggregate (i.e. unit-level) fairness perceptions influence the relationship between individuals' perceived violation of procedural justice and trust in management. Hypotheses were tested within a sample of faculty nested within different departments of a university undergoing an institution-wide budget cuts allocation process. Results largely supported our expectations: (1) the previously established individual-level relationships between procedural justice and trust were replicated in the faculty sample; (2) department-level procedural justice perceptions were related to trust in administration and (3) department-level procedural justice perceptions were shown to moderate the relationship between individual-level procedural justice perceptions and trust in management. Theoretical and practical implications of considering the context of individual-level procedural justice perceptions and reactions are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Maja Graso & Lixin Jiang & Tahira M. Probst & Wendi L. Benson, 2014. "Cross-level effects of procedural justice perceptions on faculty trust," Journal of Trust Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 147-166, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jtrust:v:4:y:2014:i:2:p:147-166
    DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2014.966830
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21515581.2014.966830
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21515581.2014.966830?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Peter Ping Li, 2017. "The time for transition: Future trust research," Journal of Trust Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 1-14, January.

    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:taf:jtrust:v:4:y:2014:i:2:p:147-166. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJTR20 .

    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.