Chinese Conceptions Of Justice And Reward Allocation
Zx Zhang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-28662-4_18
2006-01-01
Abstract:Questions about justice arise whenever decisions are made about how resources should be allocated among people. Justice takes an important role in human social life, ensuring that people receive what they are due. Researchers from several fields have explored this question. In this chapter, justice will be examined from a social psychological perspective. The study of social justice has focused on two issues: distributive justice and procedural justice. In this chapter, I focus on distributive justice, which is also the first form of justice to capture the attention of justice researchers, although procedural justice has received somewhat more attention in the past decade (Cropanzana & Greenberg, 1997). Distributive justice concerns whether resource allocation is fair in terms of the outcome people receive. As the outcome always results from a specific set of processes or procedures, people are very concerned about whether the procedures themselves are fair (Leventhal, 1980; Lind & Tyler, 1988). Distributive justice theorists generally hold two perspectives on the justice norm that allocators use to distribute rewards. Equity theorists assume that the equity principle, which dictates that one’s obtained reward is in proportion to one’s contribution, is the only way to achieve the goal of “being fair to all” (Adams, 1965; Walster, Berscheid, & Walster, 1973). In contrast, multi-principle advocates have highlighted the importance of context in which the resource allocation occurs, and argue that principles other than equity, such as equality and need, may be more appropriate in some situations (Deutsch, 1975; Lerner, 1975; Leventhal, 1980).