社会公正对政府权威合法性的影响:整体公正的中介作用
详细信息 查看官网全文
- 英文论文题名：The mediating role of overall fairness in justice–authority legitimacy relationships
- 论文作者：苏菲 ; 马红宇 ; 梁娟 ; 刘喆
- 英文论文作者：SU Fei ; MA Hongyu ; LIANGJuan ; LIU Zhe ; School of Psychology ; Central China Normal University ; Key Laboratory of Human Development and Mental Health of Hubei Province
- 年：2015
- 作者机构：华中师范大学心理学院暨湖北省人的发展与心理健康重点实验室;华中师范大学心理学院;
- 论文关键词：公正启发理论 ; 整体公正 ; 具体公正类型 ; 权威合法性
- 英文论文关键词：fairness heuristic theory ; overall justice ; specific types of justice ; authority legitimacy
- 会议召开时间：2015-10-16
- 会议录名称：第十八届全国心理学学术会议摘要集——心理学与社会发展
- 英文会议录名称：Proceedings of the 18th National Academic Congress of Psychology
- 语种：中文
- 分类号：C912.6
- 学会代码：ZGXG
- 会议名称：第十八届全国心理学学术会议
- 会议地点：中国天津
- 主办单位：中国心理学会
- 学会名称：中国心理学会
- 页数：2
- 文件大小：776k
- 原文格式：D
- 会议级别：全国
摘要
研究表明民众的社会公正感知影响民众对权威合法性的感知。相比于大量的研究主要关注某一公正类型(分配,程序,人际和信息公正)对权威合法性的预测作用,少有研究探讨整体公正对权威合法性的影响。近年来,研究者们认为应该将关注点由具体公正类型转移至整体公正。公正启发理论指出,个体首先利用不同类型的公正信息整合形成整体公正感知,然后利用整体公正感知指导自己随后的反应,换言之,相比于具体的公正类型,整体公正是结果变量的近端预测变量。因此,本研究旨在探讨民众针对地方政府的具体公正类型对其地方政府权威合法性感知的影响。其中,对地方政府的整体公正感知是具体类型公正与权威合法性感知之间的中介变量。具体来说,本研究提出假设1:针对地方政府的(a)程序公正、(b)分配公正、(c)人际公正和(d)信息公正对整体公正有显著性正向影响;假设2:具体公正类型对权威合法性感知的影响受到整体公正的中介作用。本研究拟通过两个问卷研究来验证假设。研究一拟选取某市各高校大学生群体为被试,收集该群体对地方政府的整体公正感知和具体公正类型感知(程序、分配和信息公正)及其对地方政府的权威合法性判断的数据,验证大学生群体对地方政府的整体公正感知,是具体公正类型对权威合法性判断的中介变量。研究二拟选取某市普通民众为被试样本,收集该样本群体对本地政府的整体公正感知和具体公正类型感知及其对地方政府权威合法性感知的数据,再次验证假设。当前研究通过探讨具体公正类型对整体公正的影响以及整体公正的中介作用,有助于我们了解民众对权威合法性的判断到底受到哪种公正类型的影响最大,进而帮助地方政府通过执行公正从而提高民众的权威合法性感知。
Research shows that people's social justice perception influence people's perception of the authority legitimacy. In general, this work has been characterized by examining the unique effects of different types of justice on various outcomes. That is, the focus of this research has been on how distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice independently affect individuals' authority legitimacy judgments. Recently, researchers have suggested that this singular focus on the effects of specific types of justice may not capture the depth and richness of individuals' justice experiences. These researchers suggested that a shift in focus to a consideration of overall fairness judgments may provide a more complete understanding of justice in organizational settings. Fairness heuristic theory suggests that individuals use information pertaining to different types of justice to form perceptions of overall fairness, and that overall fairness, rather than specific types of justice, drive responses to justice. Accordingly, we tested whether overall fairness mediates relationships between specific justice types and authority legitimacy judgments. Specifically, The hypothesis 1 is:(a) Distributive,(b) procedural,(c) informational, and(d) interpersonal justice each account for unique variance in overall fairness; the hypothesis 2 is controlling for other types of justice, the relationships among distributive, procedural, informational, and interpersonal justice with perceived authority legitimacy are mediated by overall fairness. We conduct two questionnaire studies to verify the hypothesis
Research shows that people's social justice perception influence people's perception of the authority legitimacy. In general, this work has been characterized by examining the unique effects of different types of justice on various outcomes. That is, the focus of this research has been on how distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice independently affect individuals' authority legitimacy judgments. Recently, researchers have suggested that this singular focus on the effects of specific types of justice may not capture the depth and richness of individuals' justice experiences. These researchers suggested that a shift in focus to a consideration of overall fairness judgments may provide a more complete understanding of justice in organizational settings. Fairness heuristic theory suggests that individuals use information pertaining to different types of justice to form perceptions of overall fairness, and that overall fairness, rather than specific types of justice, drive responses to justice. Accordingly, we tested whether overall fairness mediates relationships between specific justice types and authority legitimacy judgments. Specifically, The hypothesis 1 is:(a) Distributive,(b) procedural,(c) informational, and(d) interpersonal justice each account for unique variance in overall fairness; the hypothesis 2 is controlling for other types of justice, the relationships among distributive, procedural, informational, and interpersonal justice with perceived authority legitimacy are mediated by overall fairness. We conduct two questionnaire studies to verify the hypothesis
引文