{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/26214"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/26214","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"Cognitions and emotions - testing the tenets of Fairness Theory","abstract":"In this study, we test the tenets put forth by Fairness Theory (Folger & Cropanzano, 2001). Fairness Theory argues that perceptions of unfairness are formulated through a cognitive process that evaluates an event in terms of the presence or absence of injury or harm, the commission or omission of discretionary conduct on the part of the entity responsible for the injury or harm, and whether or not an ethical or moral standard was violated by such conduct (termed “Would,” “Could,” and “Should,” respectively). In this paper, we examine the role each of these elements plays in the assessment of fairness. Across two laboratory studies we show that a combination of harm and moral infraction shows the strongest effects on both first- and third-party justice perceptions, anger, and subsequent behaviors, whereas perceived discretion (“Could”) has little effect. Results are interpreted in light of recent research in moral psychology.","abstract_html":"In this study, we test the tenets put forth by Fairness Theory (Folger & Cropanzano, 2001). Fairness Theory argues that perceptions of unfairness are formulated through a cognitive process that evaluates an event in terms of the presence or absence of injury or harm, the commission or omission of discretionary conduct on the part of the entity responsible for the injury or harm, and whether or not an ethical or moral standard was violated by such conduct (termed “Would,” “Could,” and “Should,” respectively). In this paper, we examine the role each of these elements plays in the assessment of fairness. Across two laboratory studies we show that a combination of harm and moral infraction shows the strongest effects on both first- and third-party justice perceptions, anger, and subsequent behaviors, whereas perceived discretion (“Could”) has little effect. Results are interpreted in light of recent research in moral psychology.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Farthing, Amanda M."],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"M.A.","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Psychology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Rupp, Deborah E."],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2011,"date_issued":"2011-08-25T22:19:08Z","date_published":"2011-08-25T22:19:08Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:26Z","subjects":["Fairness Theory","organizational justice"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["Copyright 2011 Amanda M. Farthing"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/26214","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Rupp, Deborah E."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Farthing, Amanda M."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2011-08-25T22:19:08Z","2011-08"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Psychology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["M.A."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Fairness Theory","organizational justice"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright 2011 Amanda M. Farthing"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/26214"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["In this study, we test the tenets put forth by Fairness Theory (Folger & Cropanzano, 2001). Fairness Theory argues that perceptions of unfairness are formulated through a cognitive process that evaluates an event in terms of the presence or absence of injury or harm, the commission or omission of discretionary conduct on the part of the entity responsible for the injury or harm, and whether or not an ethical or moral standard was violated by such conduct (termed “Would,” “Could,” and “Should,” respectively). In this paper, we examine the role each of these elements plays in the assessment of fairness. Across two laboratory studies we show that a combination of harm and moral infraction shows the strongest effects on both first- and third-party justice perceptions, anger, and subsequent behaviors, whereas perceived discretion (“Could”) has little effect. Results are interpreted in light of recent research in moral psychology.","Item withdrawn by Mark Zulauf (zulauf@illinois.edu) on 2011-07-16T16:27:12Z Item was in collections: University of Illinois Theses & Dissertations (ID: 1) No. of bitstreams: 1 Farthing_Amanda.pdf: 192518 bytes, checksum: 25e15c1bf030fa2e9a8d322180289efc (MD5)","Made available in DSpace on 2011-08-25T22:19:08Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 Farthing_Amanda.pdf: 415385 bytes, checksum: 5c84e737ce024e4a598be13ae1c48d7e (MD5) license.txt: 4063 bytes, checksum: 67c0901dadd9167b82ade967ec757718 (MD5)"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Cognitions and emotions - testing the tenets of Fairness Theory"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Rupp, Deborah E."],"dc:creator":["Farthing, Amanda M."],"dc:date":["2011-08-25T22:19:08Z","2011-08"],"dc:description":["In this study, we test the tenets put forth by Fairness Theory (Folger & Cropanzano, 2001). Fairness Theory argues that perceptions of unfairness are formulated through a cognitive process that evaluates an event in terms of the presence or absence of injury or harm, the commission or omission of discretionary conduct on the part of the entity responsible for the injury or harm, and whether or not an ethical or moral standard was violated by such conduct (termed “Would,” “Could,” and “Should,” respectively). In this paper, we examine the role each of these elements plays in the assessment of fairness. Across two laboratory studies we show that a combination of harm and moral infraction shows the strongest effects on both first- and third-party justice perceptions, anger, and subsequent behaviors, whereas perceived discretion (“Could”) has little effect. Results are interpreted in light of recent research in moral psychology.","Item withdrawn by Mark Zulauf (zulauf@illinois.edu) on 2011-07-16T16:27:12Z Item was in collections: University of Illinois Theses & Dissertations (ID: 1) No. of bitstreams: 1 Farthing_Amanda.pdf: 192518 bytes, checksum: 25e15c1bf030fa2e9a8d322180289efc (MD5)","Made available in DSpace on 2011-08-25T22:19:08Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 Farthing_Amanda.pdf: 415385 bytes, checksum: 5c84e737ce024e4a598be13ae1c48d7e (MD5) license.txt: 4063 bytes, checksum: 67c0901dadd9167b82ade967ec757718 (MD5)"],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/26214"],"dc:language":["en"],"dc:rights":["Copyright 2011 Amanda M. Farthing"],"dc:subject":["Fairness Theory","organizational justice"],"dc:title":["Cognitions and emotions - testing the tenets of Fairness Theory"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Psychology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["M.A."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:26Z"}