Procedural and Interactive Justice


This measure, (Procedural and Interactive Justice) developed by Moorman (1991), assesses the extent to which formal procedures are established that ensure fairness, as well as the nature of the interactions that supervisors and managers have with employees in implementing the procedures. The formal procedures items describe the de­ gree to which fair procedures are established in the organization. The inter­ active items describe the perceptions that the interactions that accompanied an organization’s formal procedures are fair and considerate. The two subscales have also been used in combination to assess fairness in treatment of employees and overall procedural justice (Skarlicki & Folger, 1997; Skarlicki & Latham, 1996).


Coefficient alpha for the formal procedures subscale was .94. Alpha for the interactive justice subscale ranged from .93 to .94 (Moorman, 1991; Skarlicki & Folger, 1997). Coefficient alpha for the combined procedural and interactive justice measure ranged from .95 to .96 (Mansour-Cole & Scott, 1998; Skarlicki & Latham, 1996).


Formal procedures and interactive justice both correlated positively with job satisfaction, distributive justice, and the organizational citizenship behav­iors of courtesy, sportsmanship, and conscientiousness (Moorman, 1991). Interactive justice correlated positively with the organizational citizenship behavior of altruism and correlated negatively with retaliatory behavior (Skarlicki & Folger, 1997). The combined procedural and interactive justice items correlated positively with trust of manager, distributive fairness, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors (Mansour-Cole & Scott, 1998; Skarlicki & Latham, 1996).


Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 845-855. Items were taken from Table 1, p. 850. Copyright© 1991 by the American Psychological Association. Reprinted with permission.


Responses are obtained on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree.

Formal procedures items:

  1. Collect accurate information necessary for making decisions
  2. Provide opportunities to appeal or challenge the decision
  3. Have all sides affected by the decision represented
  4. Generate standards so that decisions could be made with consistency
  5. Hear the concerns of all those affected by the decision
  6. Provide useful feedback regarding the decision and its implementation
  7. Allow for requests for clarification or additional information about the decision

Interactive justice items:

  1. Your supervisor considered your viewpoint
  2. Your supervisor was able to suppress personal biases
  3. Your supervisor provided you with timely feedback about the decision and its implications
  4. Your supervisor treated you with kindness and consideration
  5. Your supervisor showed concern for your rights as an employee
  6. Your supervisor took steps to deal with you in a truthful manner

This content is licensed under a CC-BY license. The CC-BY licenses grant rights of use the scales in your studies (the measurement instrument and its documentation), but do not replace copyright. This remains with the copyright holder, and you have to cite us as the source.

Mohammed Looti, PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES (2023) Procedural and Interactive Justice. Retrieved from DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31575.96163