Societal Actors Shape Collective Identities of Minorities: Procedural Fairness Climate Effects on Identification, Subjec
- PDF / 854,597 Bytes
- 27 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 26 Downloads / 148 Views
Societal Actors Shape Collective Identities of Minorities: Procedural Fairness Climate Effects on Identification, Subjective Well‑Being and Psychological Health Barbara Valcke1 · Alain Van Hiel1 · Thomas Van Roey2 · Bart Van De Putte2 · Kim Dierckx1 Accepted: 31 August 2020 © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract In the present studies, we aimed to show that the perceived procedural fairness of societal actors’ multicultural decisions promotes ethnic minority members’ societal identification. These enhanced identification levels, in turn, contribute to better psychological health and well-being. Firstly, a vignette study in a sample of African Americans explored the effect of procedural fairness climate on identification. The second and third studies used self-report questionnaires. Study 2 consisted of a sample of sojourners in a university context, Study 3 analyzed online data through an African American sample. The studies provided evidence for the effect of procedural fairness climate on increased societal identification, which in turn mediates the fairness effect on increased well-being and psychological health. Societal actors can use procedural fairness to increase well-being when making decisions that involve ethnic minorities. Keywords Social identification · Minorities · Procedural fairness · Relational models · Well-being
Introduction When an authority makes a decision, people tend to evaluate this decision in terms of its level of fairness. These fairness perceptions, in turn, may have pervasive effects on how they behave within the context of their social groups (De Cremer & Tyler, 2005; Tyler & Blader, 2003; Tyler & Lind, 1992). Initially, researchers * Barbara Valcke [email protected] 1
Department of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
2
Department of Sociology, Ghent University, Campus Aula, Korte Meer 5, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
Social Justice Research
focused mainly on distributive fairness, which refers to fairness in terms of received outcomes and resource allocations (Cropanzano & Ambrose, 2001). This focus has, however, shifted over the years because several researchers have observed that not only outcomes matter, but that fairness of the processes that lead to a certain decision plays a crucial role as well (Folger & Konovsky, 1989; Leventhal, 1980, Thibaut & Walker, 1975). The latter form of fairness is referred to as ‘procedural fairness.’ Leventhal (1980) has stated that a number of specific decision criteria need to be applied for procedures to be considered as fair. These criteria include consistency, bias suppression, accuracy, correctability, ethicality and representativeness. In the context of group decisions and organizational life, several researchers have shown than when these criteria are met, a diverse set of beneficial outcomes emerge, such as group cohesiveness and loyalty (Lind & Tyler, 1988), cooperation (De Cremer & Tyler, 2005
Data Loading...
