Flint Douglas H, Hernandez-Marrero Pablo, Wielemaker Martin
Faculty of Administration, University of New Brunswick, P.O. Box 4400, Fredericton, NB E3B 5A3.
Percept Mot Skills. 2006 Feb;102(1):35-50. doi: 10.2466/pms.102.1.35-50.
This study examined polarization of perceptions of Procedural Justice. Two polarization mechanisms are examined, Persuasive Arguments and Social Comparisons. Participants were students enrolled in a first-year introductory business class. There were 216 participants in the Persuasive Arguments study, 429 in the Social Comparisons study. The average age of all participants was 22.3 yr. (SD = 2.1); 56% were women. Fields of study represented were business, engineering, information technology, and sports. Analysis showed under conditions of low Procedural Justice, polarization effects were only found with the Persuasive Arguments mechanism. Under conditions of high Procedural Justice, polarization effects were only found with Social Comparisons. Implications for group polarization and Procedural Justice theories are considered.
本研究考察了程序正义认知的两极分化。研究了两种两极分化机制,即说服性论证和社会比较。参与者是修读一年级商业入门课程的学生。说服性论证研究中有216名参与者,社会比较研究中有429名参与者。所有参与者的平均年龄为22.3岁(标准差=2.1);56%为女性。所代表的研究领域包括商业、工程、信息技术和体育。分析表明,在程序正义程度较低的情况下,仅在说服性论证机制中发现了两极分化效应。在程序正义程度较高的情况下,仅在社会比较中发现了两极分化效应。文中还考虑了群体极化和程序正义理论的相关影响。