Workplace accommodations : potential moderators of perceived fairness

This study examined variables that may influence coworkers' acceptance of accommodations made for employees with disabilities. Agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, self-esteem, and emotional intelligence were predicted to affect the relationship between procedural justice and fairness perceptions of accommodations made for disabled workers. Approximately 400 university students read one of four accommodation scenarios and provided fairness ratings in order to test eight hypotheses. Results provided evidence that the presence of procedural justice had a direct influence on participants' fairness perceptions of implemented accommodations. Participants' individual characteristics were also directly related to fairness perceptions. Additionally, conscientiousness was found to moderate the relationship between the presence of procedural justice and fairness perceptions. Findings from this study suggest that organizations should use clear and consistent guidelines and procedures to determine and implement accommodations. Additionally, findings reinforce the importance of keeping individuals informed of the ways in which decisions are made within an organization.

Fair price and its effect on willingness to purchase

The purpose of the present research is to demonstrate the influence of a fair price (independent of the subjective evaluation of the price magnitude) on buyers' willingness to purchase. The perceived fairness of a price is conceived to have three components: perceived equity, perceived need, and inferred compliance of the seller to the process rules of pricing. These components reflect the Theories of Distributive Justice (as adjusted for conditions of need) and Procedural Justice.^ The effect of the three components of a fair price on willingness to purchase is depicted in a theoretically causal chain model. Based on the Theories of Dissonance and Attribution, conditions of inequity and need activate concerns for Procedural Justice. Under conditions of inequity and need, buyers tend to infer that the seller has not complied with the generally accepted pricing practices, thus violating the social norms of Procedural justice. Inferred violations of Procedural Justice influence the buyer's attitude toward the seller. As predicted by the Theory of Reasoned Action, attitude is then positively related to willingness to purchase.^ The model was tested with a survey-based experiment conducted with 408 respondents. Two levels of both equity and need were manipulated with scenarios, a common research method in studies of Distributive and Procedural Justice. The data were analyzed with a structural equation model using LISREL. Although the effect of the "need" manipulation was insignificant, the results indicated a good fit of the model (Chi-square = 281, Degrees of Freedom = 104, Goodness of Fit Index =.924). The conclusion is that the fairness of a price does have a significant effect on willingness to purchase, independent of the subjective evaluation of the objective price. ^

Improving civil jury decision-making: Evidentiary and procedural issues

The civil jury has been under attack in recent years for being unreliable and incompetent. Considering the myriad causes for poor civil juror decision-making, the current investigation explores both procedural and evidentiary issues that impact juror's decisions. Specifically, the first phase of this dissertation examines how jurors (mis)use evidence pertaining to the litigants when determining liability and awarding damages. After investigating how jurors utilize evidence, the focus shifts to exploring the utility of procedural reforms designed to improve decision-making (specifically revising the instructions on the laws in the case and bifurcating the damage phases of the trial). Using the results from the first two phases of the research, the final study involves manipulating pieces of evidence related to the litigants while exploring the effects that revising the judicial instructions have on the utilization of evidence in particular and on decision-making in general. ^ This dissertation was run on-line, allowing participants to access the study materials at their convenience. After giving consent, participants read the scenario of a fictitious product liability case with the litigant manipulations incorporated into the summary. Participants answered several attitudinal, case-specific, and comprehension questions, and were instructed to find in favor of one side and award any damages they felt warranted. Exploratory factor analyses, Probit and linear regressions, and path analyses were used to analyze the data (M-plus and SPSS were the software packages used to conduct the analyses). Results indicated that misuse of evidence was fairly frequent, though the mock jurors also utilized evidence appropriately. Although the results did not support bifurcation as a viable procedural reform, revising the judicial instructions did significantly increase comprehension rates. Trends in the data suggested that better decision-making occurred when the revised instructions were used, thus providing empirical support for this procedural reform as a means of improving civil jury decision-making. Implications for actual trials and attorneys are discussed. ^

How effective is the motion-to -suppress safeguard? Judges' perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures

The motion-to-suppress safeguard is designed to prevent false eyewitness identifications from leading to wrongful convictions. This safeguard is effective only if judges are sensitive to factors that influence lineup suggestiveness. The present study assessed judicial sensitivity to foil, instruction, and presentation biases. Judges $(N=99)$ read a description of a hypothetical crime, perpetrator, and identification procedure, followed by a motion to suppress the identification. Judges completed a questionnaire in which they ruled on the motion and rated the lineup's suggestiveness and fairness. Foil bias and instruction bias influenced judges' rulings and lineup evaluations as predicted. Hypotheses concerning presentation bias were not supported. Results suggest a need to standardize and record identification procedures and to further educate judges about psychological research on eyewitness memory. ^

The influence of the cross -race effect on lineup construction and fairness

Lineup procedures have recently garnered extensive empirical attention, in an effort to reduce the number of mistaken identifications that plague the criminal justice system. Relatively little attention, however, has been paid to the influence of the lineup constructor or the lineup construction technique on the quality of the lineup. This study examined whether the cross-race effect has an influence on the quality of lineups constructed using a match-to-suspect or match-to-description technique in a series of three phases. Participants generated descriptions of same- and other-race targets in Phase 1, which were used in Phase 2. In Phase 2, participants were asked to create lineups for own-race targets and other-race targets using one of two techniques. The lineups created in this phase were examined for lineup quality in Phase 3 by calculating lineup fairness assessments through the use of a mock witness paradigm. ^ Overall, the results of these experiment phases suggest that the race of those involved in the lineup construction process influences lineups. There was no difference in witness description accuracy in Phase 1, which ran counter to predictions based on the cross-race effect. The cross-race effect was observed, however, in Phases 2 and 3. The lineup construction technique used also influenced several of the process measures, selection estimates, and fairness judgments in Phase 2. Interestingly, the presence of the cross-race effect was in the opposite direction as predicted for some measures in both phases. In Phase 2, the cross-race effect was as predicted for number of foils viewed, but in the opposite direction for average time spent viewing each foil. In Phase 3, the cross-race effect was in the opposite direction than predicted, with higher levels of lineup fairness in other-race lineups. The practical implications of these findings are discussed in relation to lineup fairness within the legal system. ^

A Modified Resource Distribution Fairness Measure

An important issue of resource distribution is the fairness of the distribution. For example, computer network management wishes to distribute network resource fairly to its users. To describe the fairness of the resource distribution, a quantitative fairness score function was proposed in 1984 by Jain et al. The purpose of this paper is to propose a modified network sharing fairness function so that the users can be treated differently according to their priority levels. The mathematical properties are discussed. The proposed fairness score function keeps all the nice properties of and provides better performance when the network users have different priority levels.