Table of Contents
Description
These measures were developed by Joy and Witt (1992). They are parsimonious in that they each use only three items to assess distributive and procedural justice. The procedural justice measure focuses on the extent to which employees believe they have a voice in negotiating their job assignment, job duties, and performance appraisal results. The distributive justice measure focuses on the fairness in the decisions made by the organization concerning job assignments, job duties, and performance appraisals.
Reliability
Coefficient alpha for distributive justice was .70. The alpha for procedural justice was .86 (Joy & Witt, 1992).
Validity
Distributive and procedural justice were positively correlated. The relation ship between distributive and procedural justice was smaller for employees when delays in gratification were shorter (Joy & Witt, 1992).
Source
Joy, V. L., & Witt, L.A. (1992). Delay of gratification as a moderator of the procedural justice-distributive justice relationship. Group & Organization Management, 17(3), 297-308. Copyright© 1992 by Sage Publications, Inc. Items were taken from text, p. 301. Reprinted by permission of Sage Publi cations, Inc.
Items
Responses are obtained on a 5-point Likert-type scale where 1 = definitely disagree and 5 = definitely agree.
Procedural justice items:
- I have considerable voice in determining my performance evaluation
- I have considerable voice in determining my job duties
- I have considerable voice in determining my job assignment
Distributive justice items:
- Most of my job assignments have been fair
- The treatment that I have generally received here at [company name] has been fair
- I have received fair performance evaluations