The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Justice, Fairness, and Employee Reactions
Abstract
Of all the issues that employees consider in organizational life, justice and fairness are among the most salient. Justice reflects the perceived adherence to rules that represent appropriateness in decision contexts (e.g., equity, consistency, respect, truthfulness). Fairness reflects a more global perception of appropriateness that lies downstream of justice. Our review integrates justice theories (fairness heuristic theory, the relational model, the group engagement model, fairness theory, deonance theory, uncertainty management theory) and broader theories (social exchange theory, affective events theory) to examine three questions: (a) Why do employees think about justice issues in the first place? (b) how do employees form fairness perceptions? and (c) how do employees react to those perceptions? We close by describing how justice and fairness can be managed in organizations, especially given new technological trends in how people work.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lazarus, R. S. (1991) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195069945.001.0001 · Cited by 12,691
Adams, J. S. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60108-2 · Cited by 10,818
Perceived organizational support.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500 · Cited by 10,023
Affect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations
McAllister, D. J. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256727 · Cited by 7,346
The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988) · Critical Issues in Social Justice · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2115-4 · Cited by 6,585
What Should Be Done with Equity Theory?
Leventhal, G. S. (1980) · Social Exchange · doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-3087-5_2 · Cited by 3,010 · cited 4×
“In his seminal writings on justice, Leventhal argued that fairness perceptions are formed through a cognitively rich process in which employees decide what justice rules to consider and howmuch toweigh them (e.g., Leventhal 1980, Leventhal et al. 1980).”
BackgroundInfluentialA Relational Model of Authority in Groups
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60283-x · Cited by 2,977
The Group Engagement Model: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Cooperative Behavior
Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2003) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0704_07 · Cited by 2,208
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D. E., & Wesson, M. J. (2013) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0031757 · Cited by 1,462
Self-citationEisenberger, R., Karagonlar, G., Stinglhamber, F., Neves, P., Becker, T. E., Gonzalez-Morales, M. G., & Steiger-Mueller, M. (2010) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0020858 · Cited by 652
Cited by
Newman, D. T., Fast, N. J., & Harmon, D. J. (2020) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.03.008 · Cited by 550
Highly automated job interviews: Acceptance under the influence of stakes
Langer, M., König, C. J., & Papathanasiou, M. (2019) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/ijsa.12246 · Cited by 203
Walumbwa, F. O., Hartnell, C. A., & Misati, E. (2017) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.11.013 · Cited by 179
Fairness and Decision-making in Collaborative Shift Scheduling Systems
Uhde, A., Schlicker, N., Wallach, D. P., & Hassenzahl, M. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376656 · Cited by 64
Claudy, M. C., Aquino, K., & Graso, M. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.898027 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Colquitt, J. A., & Zipay, K. P.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2015-04-10
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 75-99
- ISSN
- 2327-0608 (ISSN-L)
- 2327-0616
- OpenAlex
- W2087245834
- Cited by
- 324
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 7.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Justice, Fairness, and Employee Reactions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111457
- The paper
- Colquitt, J. A., & Zipay, K. P. (2015). Justice, Fairness, and Employee Reactions. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111457
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
