Off-campus UNL users: To download campus access dissertations, please use the following link to log into our proxy server with your NU ID and password. When you are done browsing please remember to return to this page and log out.
Non-UNL users: Please talk to your librarian about requesting this dissertation through interlibrary loan.
Instrumental and noninstrumental voice effects on perceptions of procedural justice in a performance appraisal
Abstract
Past studies (e.g., Tyler, Rasinski, & Spodick, 1985; Lind, Kanfer, & Earley, 1990) demonstrating the noninstrumental voice effect were unable to eliminate the instrumental explanation in testing their noninstrumental effect. The purposes of the present study are to test the noninstrumental theories of voice effects on perceptions of procedural justice with the possibility of instrumental explanation excluded and to assess the differential influence of procedural and distributive justice on justice-related attitudinal variables, using structural equation modeling. One hundred and twenty subjects participated in a study of the simulated performance appraisal procedure. While they were performing a 40-trial task with a computer, the computer keyboard was manipulated to be locked so that they lost some points. Except for the no-voice condition, they were allowed to voice by writing a message to a supervisor who evaluates their performance and makes a decision about the reward (outcome). Three kinds of voice were manipulated: instrumental, considered, and nonconsidered voice. Both the considered and nonconsidered voice had no instrumentality to influence the outcome decision. The considered voice had a due consideration component, whereas the nonconsidered voice did not. The results were strongly supportive of instrumental theories of the voice effect. That is, when a voice opportunity is perceived as being instrumental to obtain a desired or favorable outcome, it enhances people's perceptions of procedural justice, their satisfaction with the outcome, their evaluations of decision-makers and of the overall performance appraisal system. However, the noninstrumental voice effect was marginal and open to question. If the voice opportunity lacks the instrumentality to reach positive outcomes, its effect on enhancing the perception of procedural justice is greatly weakened, although the voice is considered by the decision-maker. Simply providing the voice opportunity alone without either instrumentality or due consideration had no impact on perceptions of procedural justice. Findings from structural equation analysis were not supportive of the argument that procedural justice effects are associated uniquely with system evaluations and distributive justice effects are associated uniquely with personal or outcome evaluations.
Subject Area
Occupational psychology|Social psychology
Recommended Citation
Suh, Yongwon, "Instrumental and noninstrumental voice effects on perceptions of procedural justice in a performance appraisal" (1992). ETD collection for University of Nebraska-Lincoln. AAI9308197.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissertations/AAI9308197