Procedural and moral influences on fairness judgments, decision acceptance, and organizational behavior

Current theories of justice emphasize the influence that decision-making procedures have on perceptions of fairness and cooperation in groups (e.g., Tyler & Lind, 1992). However, recent studies have suggested that procedural propriety is not always the primary determinant of perceived fairness. When people perceive outcomes to have moral implications, fairness judgments are more likely to be determined by whether people's preferred outcomes are achieved than by procedural information (e.g., Mullen & Skitka, 2005).;The current research explored previously unexamined issues relating to whether and how morality restricts the effect of procedural fairness on justice judgments. Results of three experiments indicated that moral mandates about decision outcomes affected justice judgments (a) made outside of judicial and legislative contexts, (b) when perceivers had voice and firsthand experience with decision-making procedures, and (c) independent of multiple types of procedural information (i.e., treatment and decision-making quality). The studies also demonstrated that the effect of moral mandates generalized to behavioral intentions toward decision-relevant groups and was robust in a situation designed to accentuate procedural fairness effects. Moreover, analyses indicated that moral outrage and positive emotions mediated the moral mandate effects. Implications of the results for theories of motives that prompt justice judgments are discussed.