Framing effects in justice perceptions: Prospect theory and counterfactuals

    Authors

    D. B. Ganegoda;R. Folger

    Comments

    Authors: contact us about adding a copy of your work at STARS@ucf.edu

    Abbreviated Journal Title

    Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process.

    Keywords

    Fairness theory; Prospect theory; Organizational justice; Counterfactuals; ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE; SOCIAL-EXCHANGE; DECISIONS; PSYCHOLOGY; JUDGMENT; RISK; METAANALYSIS; RATIONALITY; MILLENNIUM; INDUSTRIAL; Psychology, Applied; Management; Psychology, Social

    Abstract

    The majority of organizational justice research is underscored by the assumption that individuals form justice perceptions based on deliberate processing of information, using various justice judgment criteria. Taking an alternative view, this research examined how individuals form fairness perceptions in less deliberate ways-in particular, based on the way in which a decision outcome is framed. Drawing on prospect theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979), we argued that decision outcomes that are framed in line with prospect theory's predictions would attenuate counterfactual processing because those outcomes are consistent with individuals' biased preferences. Drawing on fairness theory (Folger & Cropanzano, 1998, 2001), we argued that lower levels of counterfactual thinking increases the tendency for a decision to seem fair; therefore, framing a decision in a way that is consistent with a pre-existing bias could increase the extent to which it is perceived as fair. We found support for our hypotheses in two experiments. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

    Journal Title

    Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

    Volume

    126

    Publication Date

    1-1-2015

    Document Type

    Article

    Language

    English

    First Page

    27

    Last Page

    36

    WOS Identifier

    WOS:000348555300003

    ISSN

    0749-5978

    Share

    COinS