Extending the Deontic Model of Justice: Moral Self-Regulation in Third-Party Responses to Injustice

被引:102
作者
Rupp, Deborah E.
Bell, Chris M.
机构
关键词
DECISION-MAKING; DISENGAGEMENT; ORGANIZATIONS; DISCREPANCY; FAIRNESS; POWER;
D O I
10.5840/beq20102017
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The deontic model of justice and ethical behavior proposes that people care about justice Simply for the sake of justice. This is an important consideration for business ethics because it implies that justice and ethical behavior are naturally occurring phenomena independent of system controls or individual self-interest. To date, research on the deontic model and third-party reactions to injustice has focused primarily on individuals' tendency to punish transgressors. This research has revealed that witnesses to injustice will consider sacrificing their own resources if it is the only way to sanction an observed transgressor. In this paper we seek to extend this model by arguing that punishment may not be the only "deontic" reaction, and that in fact, third-party observers of injustice may engage in moral self-regulation that Would lead them to conclude that the most ethical response is to do nothing. We provide preliminary evidence for our propositions using voiced cognitions data collected during a resource allocation task. Results indicate that deonance may be more complex than originally thought, and previous tests of the model conservative in nature.
引用
收藏
页码:89 / 106
页数:18
相关论文
共 52 条
[41]   The role of moral disengagement in the execution process [J].
Osofsky, MJ ;
Bandura, A ;
Zimbardo, PG .
LAW AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2005, 29 (04) :371-393
[42]   Different wrongs, different remedies? Reactions to organizational remedies after procedural and interactional injustice [J].
Reb, J ;
Goldman, BM ;
Kray, LJ ;
Cropanzano, R .
PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 59 (01) :31-64
[43]   Cognitive load and the equality heuristic: A two-stage model of resource overconsumption in small groups [J].
Roch, SG ;
Lane, JAS ;
Samuelson, CD ;
Allison, ST ;
Dent, JL .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 2000, 83 (02) :185-212
[44]  
Rupp D. E., 2003, 18 ANN C SOC IND ORG
[45]  
Rupp DE, 2007, RES MULTI LEVEL ISS, V6, P357, DOI 10.1016/S1475-9144(07)06017-1
[46]   Third-party reactions to employee (mis)treatment: A justice perspective [J].
Skarlicki, DP ;
Kulik, CT .
RESEARCH IN ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR: AN ANNUAL SERIES OF ANALYTICAL ESSAYS AND CRITICAL REVIEWS, VOL 26, 2005, 26 :183-229
[47]   Behavioral ethics in organizations:: A review [J].
Trevino, Linda K. ;
Weaver, Gary R. ;
Reynolds, Scott J. .
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, 2006, 32 (06) :951-990
[48]   Is virtue its own reward? Self-sacrificial decisions for the sake of fairness [J].
Turillo, CJ ;
Folger, R ;
Lavelle, JJ ;
Umphress, EE ;
Gee, JO .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 2002, 89 (01) :839-865
[49]  
VANDENBOS K, 2007, SELF REGULATION BEHA
[50]   INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES IN NEED FOR COGNITIVE CLOSURE [J].
WEBSTER, DM ;
KRUGLANSKI, AW .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1994, 67 (06) :1049-1062