The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An employee-centered model of organizational justice and social responsibility
Abstract
This paper reviews recent research within the area of organizational justice. It argues that a key element of the employee experience is the formation of perceptions about how both the self and others are treated by organizational stakeholders, as well as the level of dignity and respect bestowed by the organization to external groups. Employees, therefore, look in, around, and out, in order to comprehend their working experiences, and depend on these judgments to navigate the organizational milieu. A full understanding of justice phenomena requires consideration of individual differences; contextual influences; affective, cognitive, and social processes; as well as a person-centric orientation that allows for both time and memory to influence the social construction of worker phenomena.
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
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 54,599
Adams, J. S. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60108-2 · Cited by 10,818
A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance
Carroll, A. B. (1979) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/257850 · Cited by 10,480
Social Exchange Theory: An Interdisciplinary Review
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206305279602 · Cited by 10,068
Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840603024003910 · Cited by 7,641
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 · cited 1×
“One perspective within this domain has a revivalist flare to it (see Leventhal, 1980; Leventhal, Karuza, & Fry, 1980; Lind & Tyler, 1988).”
BackgroundJustice 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
WHY COMPANIES GO GREEN: A MODEL OF ECOLOGICAL RESPONSIVENESS.
Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/1556363 · Cited by 4,020
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 1×
“One perspective within this domain has a revivalist flare to it (see Leventhal, 1980; Leventhal, Karuza, & Fry, 1980; Lind & Tyler, 1988).”
BackgroundA 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
Cited by
Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review
Mackey, J. D., Frieder, R. E., Brees, J. R., & Martinko, M. J. (2017) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206315573997 · Cited by 706
Úbeda-García, M., Claver-Cortés, E., Marco-Lajara, B., & Zaragoza-Sáez, P. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.055 · Cited by 335
Johnson, R. E., Lanaj, K., & Barnes, C. M. (2014) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0035647 · Cited by 277
It’s about time: New perspectives and insights on time management
Aeon, B., & Aguinis, H. (2017) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2016.0166 · Cited by 197
Donia, M. B. L., Ronen, S., Tetrault Sirsly, C.-A., & Bonaccio, S. (2019) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-017-3673-5 · Cited by 193
Metadata
- Authors
- E. Rupp, D.
- Venue
- Organizational Psychology Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-02
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 72-94
- ISSN
- 2041-3866 (ISSN-L)
- 2041-3874
- OpenAlex
- W2038151244
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 35.29
- 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
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.
