Who would accept to bear some responsibility for an unfair pay? The moderating role of personal and general just-world beliefs

Détails

ID Serval
serval:BIB_39790CC566E5
Type
Actes de conférence (partie): contribution originale à la littérature scientifique, publiée à l'occasion de conférences scientifiques, dans un ouvrage de compte-rendu (proceedings), ou dans l'édition spéciale d'un journal reconnu (conference proceedings).
Sous-type
Abstract (résumé de présentation): article court qui reprend les éléments essentiels présentés à l'occasion d'une conférence scientifique dans un poster ou lors d'une intervention orale.
Collection
Publications
Titre
Who would accept to bear some responsibility for an unfair pay? The moderating role of personal and general just-world beliefs
Titre de la conférence
15th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Justice Research, june 19-22, 2014, New-York City : [conference program]
Auteur⸱e⸱s
Bollmann G.
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
2014
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Langue
anglais
Résumé
Previous justice research examined how and why people attribute responsibility of aversive outcomes to others. Yet, sometimes people accept their own share of responsibility for these outcomes, be it judicious or not. Extending recent research examining how justice affects the relation between outcomes and internal attributions of responsibility, I focus on distributive justice and the role of just‐world beliefs. In a first online experiment, participants (N = 108) were more likely to accept responsibility for an unfavorable pay when this latter was fairly rather than unfairly allocated. Moreover just‐world beliefs moderated this relation: it was stronger for those with a high rather than a low personal just‐world belief and weaker for those with a high rather than a low general just‐world belief. This remained the case after controlling for perceptions of the supervisor's responsibility. Distributive justice and outcome favorability were then manipulated in second online experiment (N = 156). Just‐world beliefs again moderated the relation between
distributive justice and participants' internal attributions. Moreover, both interactions remained significant after controlling for participants' perceived favorability of the decision, their perceptions of the supervisor's responsibility and their feeling of decision latitude over others. We discuss implications of our findings for organizational justice theories and elaborate on the many facets of responsibility feelings.
Création de la notice
07/09/2015 23:35
Dernière modification de la notice
20/08/2019 13:29
Données d'usage