The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow
Abstract
The present article chronicles the history of the field of organizational justice, identifies current themes, and recommends new directions for the future. A historical overview of the field focuses on research and theory in the distributive justice tradition (e.g., equity theory) as well as the burgeoning topic of procedural justice. This forms the foundation for the discussion offive popular themes in contemporary organizational justice research: (a) attempts to distinguish procedural justice and distributive justice empirically, (b) the development of new conceptual advances, (c) consideration of the interpersonal determinants of procedural justice judgments, (d) new directions in tests of equity theory, and (e) applications of justice-based explanations to many different organizational phenomena. In closing, a plea is made for future work that improves procedural justice research methodologically (with respect to scope, setting, and scaling), and that attempts to integrate and unify disparate concepts in the distributive and procedural justice traditions.
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
Adams, J. S. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60108-2 · Cited by 10,818
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
Downward comparison principles in social psychology
Wills, T. A. (1981) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.90.2.245 · Cited by 2,705
What is Procedural Justice?: Criteria Used by Citizens to Assess the Fairness of Legal Procedures
Tyler, T. R. (1988) · Law & Society Review · doi:10.2307/3053563 · Cited by 912
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1978) · California Law Review · doi:10.2307/3480099 · Cited by 737
Distributional and Procedural Aspects of Satisfaction With Citizen-Police Encounters
Tyler, T. R., & Folger, R. (1980) · Basic and Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15324834basp0104_1 · Cited by 282
Distributive and procedural justice in the workplace
Folger, R. (1987) · Social Justice Research · doi:10.1007/bf01048013 · Cited by 183
Cited by
Damschroder, L. J., Aron, D. C., Keith, R. E., Kirsh, S. R., Alexander, J. A., & Lowery, J. C. (2009) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-50 · Cited by 14,496
“Organizational justice is an individual's perception of distributive and procedural fairness in the organization [65].”
BackgroundPerceived organizational support: a review of the literature.
Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698 · Cited by 7,592
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
Consequences of abusive supervision.
Tepper, B. J. (2000) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/1556375 · Cited by 3,810
Moorman, R. H. (1991) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037//0021-9010.76.6.845 · Cited by 3,422
Metadata
- Authors
- Greenberg, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1990-06
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 399-432
- ISSN
- 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-1211
- OpenAlex
- W1971870746
- Cited by
- 3,651
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 35.91
- 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: Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/014920639001600208
- The paper
- Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639001600208
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.
