Premium
Interpersonal and intrapersonal justice: The effect of subject and confederate outcomes on evaluations of fairness
Author(s) -
O'Malley Michael N.
Publication year - 1983
Publication title -
european journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.609
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1099-0992
pISSN - 0046-2772
DOI - 10.1002/ejsp.2420130203
Subject(s) - intrapersonal communication , psychology , interpersonal communication , entitlement (fair division) , social psychology , economic justice , subject (documents) , referent , political science , law , linguistics , philosophy , mathematics , mathematical economics , library science , computer science
Subjects were asked to make justice judgments based on different comparison standards—intrapersonal and interpersonal standards. The intrapersonal standard of entitlement was induced through a promise. Subjects were either given more than ($4.00), less than ($1.00), or exactly ($2.50) the reward promised for completion of an assigned task. By providing subjects access to information pertaining to a confederate co‐worker's outcomes, subjects were able to evaluate the equitableness (an interpersonal standard) of the distribution. Confederates also received one of three levels of reward (i.e. $1.00, $2.50, or $4.00). It was found that evaluations of fairness depend on the criteria used in making the assessment; if intrapersonal comparisons are employed, subjects produce justice judgments quite different from those grounded on an interpersonal referent. A main effect for subject outcome was obtained when the prevailing standard was intrapersonal and an interaction between subject and confederate outcomes was found when the prevailing standard was interpersonal. One implication of these results is that it is possible for an equitable distribution to still be considered unjust.