Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.
verifiedrich profile · Journal of Applied Psychology · 2001
Colquitt, Jason A.; Conlon, Donald E.; Wesson, Michael J.; Porter, Christopher O. L. H.; Ng, K. Yee
How this was studied
A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.
What this article reports
The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.
interactional justice → job satisfaction
procedural justice → trust in organization
procedural justice → organizational citizenship behavior ocb
procedural justice → organizational commitment
interactional justice → trust in organization
procedural justice → organizational citizenship behavior ocb
procedural justice → task performance
distributive justice → job satisfaction
organizational justice → task performance
distributive justice → job satisfaction
procedural justice → task performance
organizational justice → job satisfaction
interactional justice → organizational citizenship behavior ocb
interactional justice → task performance
procedural justice → organizational citizenship behavior ocb
procedural justice → turnover intention
organizational justice → organizational citizenship behavior ocb
interactional justice → turnover intention
distributive justice → organizational commitment
procedural justice → task performance
procedural justice → organizational commitment
procedural justice → job satisfaction
distributive justice → trust in organization
organizational justice → organizational commitment
organizational justice → trust in organization
organizational justice → task performance
interactional justice → organizational commitment
organizational justice → counterproductive work behaviours
procedural justice → job satisfaction
Models this article informs
The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.
distributive justice correlates job satisfaction
distributive justice correlates organizational commitment
distributive justice correlates trust in organization
distributive justice predicts job satisfaction
interactional justice correlates trust in organization
interactional justice predicts counterproductive work behaviours
interactional justice predicts job satisfaction
interactional justice predicts organizational citizenship behavior ocb
interactional justice predicts organizational commitment
interactional justice predicts task performance
interactional justice predicts turnover intention
organizational justice correlates counterproductive work behaviours
organizational justice predicts counterproductive work behaviours
organizational justice predicts job satisfaction
organizational justice predicts organizational citizenship behavior ocb
organizational justice predicts organizational commitment
organizational justice predicts task performance
organizational justice predicts trust in organization
procedural justice correlates job satisfaction
procedural justice correlates organizational citizenship behavior ocb
procedural justice correlates organizational commitment
procedural justice correlates task performance
procedural justice correlates trust in organization
procedural justice correlates turnover intention
procedural justice predicts job satisfaction
procedural justice predicts organizational citizenship behavior ocb
procedural justice predicts organizational commitment
procedural justice predicts task performance
procedural justice predicts turnover intention
In the authors’ words
The article’s own abstract.
The field of organizational justice continues to be marked by several important research questions, including the size of relationships among justice dimensions, the relative importance of different justice criteria, and the unique effects of justice dimensions on key outcomes. To address such questions, the authors conducted a meta-analytic review of 183 justice studies. The results suggest that although different justice dimensions are moderately to highly related, they contribute incremental variance explained in fairness perceptions. The results also illustrate the overall and unique relationships among distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice and several organizational outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commitment, evaluation of authority, organizational citizenship behavior, withdrawal, performance). These findings are reviewed in terms of their implications for future research on organizational justice.
What the literature says about it
Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.
supports “When an employee perceives that they are treated fairly, they tend to show a higher level of performance and better organizational citizenship behavior (Colquitt et al., 2001).”
supports “11 When PHCWs perceive unfairness in any of the organizational justice dimensions, they may experience dissatisfaction, frustration, and heightened levels of stress, 12,13 potentially leading to turnover intention even in the face of improvements in other motivational factors, such as compensation…”
supports “However, interactional fairness perceptions of AI found less attention (Karim et al. 2015; Robert et al. 2020) despite their importance for other outcomes, such as collective esteem (Colquitt 2001), leader-member-exchange (Roch and Shanock 2006), and task performance (Alder and Ambrose 2005).”
supports “When an employee perceives that they are treated fairly, they tend to show a higher level of performance and better organizational citizenship behavior (Colquitt et al., 2001).”
supports “Since evidence indicate that employees’ perception of fairness is positively related to job satisfaction, perceived organizational support, leader–member exchange, task performance, work engagement, organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviour; and negatively related to job burnout, turnover intentions and counterproductive work behaviour [29-31]; it is imperative to provide context-specific evidence of healthcare professionals’ perceptions of”
supports “…at the individual, group and organizational level (e.g. innovation, higher job satisfaction, increased employee retention, improved performance and wellbeing) and are associated with higher levels of organizational commitment (Colquitt et al., 2001; Findler et al., 2007; Mor Barak et al., 2016).”
supports “…results have shown that the different types of justice are related to individual outcomes, such as trust, commitment, performance, satisfaction, organizational attractiveness, and withdrawal behavior (Chapman et al. 2005; Colquitt et al. 2001, 2022; Hausknecht et al. 2004; Robert et al. 2020).”
supports “Similarly, Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001) and Colquitt et al. (2001) found that interactional justice had a negative impact on employees’ intention to leave voluntarily.”
supports “Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001) and Colquitt et al. (2001) conducted two meta-analyses and found a significant relationship between distributive, procedural, interactional justice, and organizational trust.”
supports “Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001) and Colquitt et al. (2001) conducted two meta-analyses and found a significant relationship between distributive, procedural, interactional justice, and organizational trust.”
supports “Based on the picture, it can be explained that Distributive Justice (X 1 ) and Procedural Justice (X 2 ) have an effect on Job Satisfaction (Z), Distributive Justice and Procedural Justice have a direct effect on performance (Y), then Job Satisfaction as a mediating variable has a direct effect on Performance.”
supports “In turn, their subjective evaluation of justice is associated with, for instance, attitudes towards the organization, work behavior, organizational commitment, trust, and withdrawal behavior (Cohen-Charash and Spector 2001; Colquitt et al. 2001).”
supports “Due to the efforts to explain changes, informational justice is related to establishing trust (Colquitt et al., 2001), This is crucial for the development of important employees’ responsiveness to organizational performance during transitions.”
supports “Based on the picture, it can be explained that Distributive Justice (X 1 ) and Procedural Justice (X 2 ) have an effect on Job Satisfaction (Z), Distributive Justice and Procedural Justice have a direct effect on performance (Y), then Job Satisfaction as a mediating variable has a direct effect on Performance.”
supports “Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001) and Colquitt et al. (2001) also highlighted a significant influence of procedural justice on organizational trust, indicating that organizational justice can predict organizational trust in the organization.”
supports “[36] found that distributive justice is a significant predictor of job satisfaction, while Masterson et al.”
supports “…at the individual, group and organizational level (e.g. innovation, higher job satisfaction, increased employee retention, improved performance and wellbeing) and are associated with higher levels of organizational commitment (Colquitt et al., 2001; Findler et al., 2007; Mor Barak et al., 2016).”
supports “Likewise low level of the organizational justice evidently affect counterproductive behavior of the employees, disengagement, retaliation (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt et al., 2001) and negative behavior.”
supports “…results have shown that the different types of justice are related to individual outcomes, such as trust, commitment, performance, satisfaction, organizational attractiveness, and withdrawal behavior (Chapman et al. 2005; Colquitt et al. 2001, 2022; Hausknecht et al. 2004; Robert et al. 2020).”
supports “In this regard, a meta-analysis exploring 25 years of procedural justice research indicates that procedural justice is a key variable in explaining workplace performance and organizational citizenship behavior [53].”
supports “Then, in the meta-analysis conducted by Colquitt et al. (2001) and also by CohenCharash and Spector (2001) suggest that procedural, distributive, and interactional justice is highly correlated with affective commitment (as well as organizational belief).”
supports “Then, in the meta-analysis conducted by Colquitt et al. (2001) and also by CohenCharash and Spector (2001) suggest that procedural, distributive, and interactional justice is highly correlated with affective commitment (as well as organizational belief).”
supports “…example, organizational fairness perceptions are associated with increased citizenship behaviors, enhanced job satisfaction, positive evaluations of organizational representatives, and reduced withdrawal and turnover (for meta-analytic reviews, see Colquitt et al., 2001, 2013; Rupp et al., 2014).”
supports “In this regard, a meta-analysis exploring 25 years of procedural justice research indicates that procedural justice is a key variable in explaining workplace performance and organizational citizenship behavior [53].”
supports “Colquitt et al. (2001) found that ethical climate, distributive justice, and CSR climate significantly predict employee reactions to performance management processes, including satisfaction with the system, commitment to the organization, and job performance, a finding basically replicated by…”
supports “Specifically, procedural and distributive justice types both have been found to equally predict turnover intentions while interactional justice least predicted intentions (Colquitt et al., 2001).”
supports “…results have shown that the different types of justice are related to individual outcomes, such as trust, commitment, performance, satisfaction, organizational attractiveness, and withdrawal behavior (Chapman et al. 2005; Colquitt et al. 2001, 2022; Hausknecht et al. 2004; Robert et al. 2020).”
supports “In turn, their subjective evaluation of justice is associated with, for instance, attitudes towards the organization, work behavior, organizational commitment, trust, and withdrawal behavior (Cohen-Charash and Spector 2001; Colquitt et al. 2001).”
supports “Due to the efforts to explain changes, informational justice is related to establishing trust (Colquitt et al., 2001), This is crucial for the development of important employees’ responsiveness to organizational performance during transitions.”
supports “Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001) and Colquitt et al. (2001) also highlighted a significant influence of procedural justice on organizational trust, indicating that organizational justice can predict organizational trust in the organization.”
supports “Distributive justice has been shown to be significantly related to employee work-related attitudes and behaviors such as outcome satisfaction, system and agentreferenced evaluation of authorities, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, trust, and OCB [52].”
supports “…example, organizational fairness perceptions are associated with increased citizenship behaviors, enhanced job satisfaction, positive evaluations of organizational representatives, and reduced withdrawal and turnover (for meta-analytic reviews, see Colquitt et al., 2001, 2013; Rupp et al., 2014).”
supports “Colquitt et al. (2001) conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis and found that distributive and procedural justices have significant relationship with organizational commitment.”
supports “…at the individual, group and organizational level (e.g. innovation, higher job satisfaction, increased employee retention, improved performance and wellbeing) and are associated with higher levels of organizational commitment (Colquitt et al., 2001; Findler et al., 2007; Mor Barak et al., 2016).”
supports “Distributive justice has been shown to be significantly related to employee work-related attitudes and behaviors such as outcome satisfaction, system and agentreferenced evaluation of authorities, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, trust, and OCB [52].”
supports “Colquitt et al. (2001) conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis and found that distributive and procedural justices have significant relationship with organizational commitment.”
supports “Perhaps researchers explained the importance of organizational justice (colquitt et al., 2001). a meta-analysis suggested distributive justice as a decisive predictor of ocB (colquitt et al., 2001).”
supports “Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001) and Colquitt et al. (2001) conducted two meta-analyses and found a significant relationship between distributive, procedural, interactional justice, and organizational trust.”
supports “Specifically, procedural and distributive justice types both have been found to equally predict turnover intentions while interactional justice least predicted intentions (Colquitt et al., 2001).”
supports “Based on the picture, it can be explained that Distributive Justice (X 1 ) and Procedural Justice (X 2 ) have an effect on Job Satisfaction (Z), Distributive Justice and Procedural Justice have a direct effect on performance (Y), then Job Satisfaction as a mediating variable has a direct effect on Performance.”
supports “Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001) and Colquitt et al. (2001) conducted two meta-analyses and found a significant relationship between distributive, procedural, interactional justice, and organizational trust.”
supports “…results have shown that the different types of justice are related to individual outcomes, such as trust, commitment, performance, satisfaction, organizational attractiveness, and withdrawal behavior (Chapman et al. 2005; Colquitt et al. 2001, 2022; Hausknecht et al. 2004; Robert et al. 2020).”
supports “The regression coefficient value is 0.651, so for every addition of 1% in Procedural Justice, there is an addition of 0.651 in Performance.”
supports “Due to the efforts to explain changes, informational justice is related to establishing trust (Colquitt et al., 2001), This is crucial for the development of important employees’ responsiveness to organizational performance during transitions.”
Ancillary research
Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.
- 10.7753/ijcatr1011.1003
- 10.1017/xps.2021.23
- 10.29040/ijebar.v8i1.11134
- 10.21608/jaauth.2023.211136.1456
- 10.2147/rmhp.s486535
- 10.1007/s11846-024-00789-3
- 10.24425/ppb.2020.133770
- 10.1186/s12913-020-05187-5
- 10.1007/s10997-024-09721-z
- 10.24294/jipd.v8i5.5077
- 10.1080/10864415.2018.1462951
- 10.5430/mos.v6n2p9
- 10.37010/jdc.v4i2.1335
- 10.1177/21582440241257378
- 10.28991/esj-2023-sied2-08
- 10.1080/23311975.2022.2124602
- 10.1016/j.jwb.2021.101205
- 10.3390/su132212476
- 10.21776/ub.apmba.2018.006.03.4
- 10.1177/01492063241237221
- 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1323910
- 10.1177/2158244019898828
- 10.1155/2021/7040620
- 10.47067/real.v4i2.146
- 10.1080/23311886.2024.2401207
Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.