The DOI matches its Crossref record.
What Should Be Done with Equity Theory?
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“For instance, procedural fairness perceptions are measured considering perceptions of procedural voice, outcome control, consistency of procedures across participants, suppression of bias, accuracy of factors, correctability of outcomes, and ethicality of the process [62,89].”
From Disentangling Fairness Perceptions in Algorithmic Decision-Making: the Effects of Explanations, Human Oversight, and Contestability (2023) · cites this paper as [62]
In the citing paper
“This is somewhat unsurprising considering that correctability directly refers to the requirement of having an appeal process in place [62].”
From Disentangling Fairness Perceptions in Algorithmic Decision-Making: the Effects of Explanations, Human Oversight, and Contestability (2023) · cites this paper as [62]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425 · Cited by 5,942
On the dimensionality of organizational justice: a construct validation of a measure.
Colquitt, J. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.386 · Cited by 6,043
“…theoretical dimensionality of organizational justice and (b) to perform a construct validation of a new justice measure, one that closely follows the original explications laid out in the seminal works in the area (e.g., Bies & Moag, 1986; Leventhal, 1976; Leventhal, 1980; Thibaut & Walker, 1975).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialOrganizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow
Greenberg, J. (1990) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639001600208 · Cited by 3,666
Moorman, R. H. (1991) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037//0021-9010.76.6.845 · Cited by 3,422
“For example, Leventhal (1980) suggested that procedural justice perceptions influenced subsequent perceptions of distributive justice.”
BackgroundConsequences of abusive supervision.
Tepper, B. J. (2000) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/1556375 · Cited by 3,810
Metadata
- Authors
- Leventhal, G. S.
- Affiliations
- Wayne State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Leventhal, Gerald S.
- ORCID
- Leventhal, Gerald S.
- Venue
- Social Exchange
- Publisher
- Springer US
- Published
- 1980
- Pages
- 27-55
- OpenAlex
- W1526225581
- Cited by
- 3,010
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 130 · 2025: 109 · 2024: 114 · 2023: 122 · 2022: 168 · 2021: 157 · 2020: 153 · 2019: 124 · 2018: 137 · 2017: 133 · 2016: 124 · 2015: 114 · 2014: 120 · 2013: 93 · 2012: 129
- FWCI
- 16.34
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Springer eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- equity theory, reward allocation, resource allocation, social systems, organizational justice, punishment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
