Cited by 1,185Employer Branding and e-HRMJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The Perceived Fairness of Selection Systems: An Organizational Justice Perspective

Gilliland, Stephen W.·1993·The Academy of Management Review

Abstract

A justice model of applicants' reactions to employment-selection systems is proposed as a basis for organizing previous findings and guiding future research. Organizational justice literature is briefly reviewed, and key findings are used to provide a framework for the proposed model and to support hypotheses. The procedural justice of selection systems is examined in terms of 10 procedural rules, wherein the satisfaction and violation of these rules provide the basis for fairness reactions. Distributive justice of hiring decisions is examined with respect to equity, equality, and needs. The model also includes the interaction of procedural and distributive justice and the relationship of fairness reactions to individual and organizational outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/258595

Cites

109 of 109 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gilliland, S. W.
Affiliations
Louisiana State University (US)
Corresponding author
Gilliland, Stephen W.
Venue
The Academy of Management Review
Published
1993-10
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
694
ISSN
0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1969870724
Cited by
1,185
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 54 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 53 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 53
FWCI
18.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Academy of Management Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employer Branding and e-HRM
  • 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
perceived fairness, organizational justice, procedural justice, distributive justice, applicant reactions, hiring decisions, equity, equality, needs, justice model

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