Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Disability and Procedural Fairness in the Workplace

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Disability and Aging Discrimination

Abstract

In a recent law review article, Peter Blanck (2006) writes movingly about disabled individuals’ experiences with, and reactions to, workplace discrimination, “… they wanted real jobs. They did not want to live on welfare checks; they wanted paychecks. They fought to be participants in society and not view the world as outsiders from a nursing home bed.” (p. 694). Blanck’s stories are about disabled Americans who fought against discrimination. The individuals were discriminated against because of their disabilities: they were fired from their jobs; denied the necessary accommodations to perform their assigned tasks; and denied equal access to governmental services and public facilities.

We receive so many messages from the nondisabled world that we are not wanted, that we are considered less than human. For those with restricted mobility or sensory disabilities, the very physical environment tells us we don’t belong. It tells us that we aren’t wanted in the places that nondisabled people spend their lives—their homes, their schools and colleges, their workshops, their leisure venues…

(Morris, 1991, pp. 26–27)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For reviews of the relative impact of procedural and distributive fairness on a variety of attitudinal and behavioral reactions, see Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, and Ng (2001), and Skitka, Winquist, and Hutchinson (2003).

  2. 2.

    For an empirical examination of various dimensions of justice, including informational, interactional, formal, and interpersonal dimensions, see Colquitt (2001).

References

  • Adams, J. S., & Rosenbaum, W. E. (1962). The relationship of worker productivity to cognitive dissonance about wage inequity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 46, 161–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. L. (2000). “Deserving disabilities”: Why the definition of disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act should be revised to eliminate the substantial limitation requirement. Missouri Law Review, 65, 83–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldridge, D. C., & Veiga, J. F. (2001). Toward a greater understanding of the willingness to request an accommodation: Can requesters’ beliefs disable the Americans with Disabilities Act? The Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 85–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton, L. (1993). The struggle for citizenship: The case of disabled people. Disability, Handicap and Society, 8(3), 235–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations (pp. 43–55). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blader, S. L., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). A four-component model of procedural justice: Defining the meaning of a “fair” process. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(6), 747–758.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blanck, P. (2001). Civil war pensions and disability. Ohio State Law Journal, 62, 109–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanck, P. (2006). Americans with disabilities and their civil rights: Past, present, and future. University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 66, 687–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanck, P., & Marti, M. W. (1997). Attitudes, behavior, and the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Villanova Law Review, 42, 345–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bordieri, J. E., & Drehmer, D. E. (1987). Attribution of responsibility and predicted social acceptance of disabled workers. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 30, 218–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bordieri, J. E., Drehmer, D. E., & Comninel, M. E. (1988). Attribution of responsibility and hiring recommendations for job applicants with low back pain. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 32, 140–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braband, J., & Lerner, M. J. (1974). “A little time and effort”… Who deserves what from whom? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1, 177–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J. (1990). Scope of justice in the workplace: How survivors react to co-worker layoffs. Journal of Social Issues, 46(1), 95–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., Ackerman, G., Greenberg, J., Gelfand, M. J., Francesco, A. M., Chen, Z. X., et al. (2001). Culture and procedural justice: The influence of power distance on reactions to voice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(4), 300–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., DeWitt, R. L., Grover, S., & Reed, T. (1990). When it is especially important to explain why: Factors affecting the relationship between managers’ explanations of a layoff and survivors’ reactions to the layoff. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(5), 389–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120(2), 189–208.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (2005). How, when, and why does outcome favorability interact with procedural fairness? In J. Greenberg & J. A. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 525–553). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., Wiesenfeld, B. M., & Martin, C. L. (1995). Decision frame, procedural justice, and survivors’ reactions to job layoffs. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63(1), 59–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. R., Brockner, J., & Greenberg, J. (2003). When is it “a pleasure to do business with you?” The effects of relative status, outcome favorability, and procedural fairness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 92(1–2), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clyman, R. I., Roth, R. S., Sniderman, S. H., & Charrier, J. (1980). Does a belief in a “just world” affect health care provides reactions to perinatal illness? Journal of Medical Education, 55, 538–539.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 278–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2002). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis: Erratum. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89(2), 1215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colella, A. (2001). Coworker distributive fairness judgments of the workplace accommodation of employees with disabilities. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 100–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colella, A., Paetzold, R. L., & Belliveau, M. A. (2004). Factors affecting coworkers’ procedural justice inferences of the workplace accommodations of employees with disabilities. Personnel Psychology, 57(1), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386–400.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, O. L. H., and Ng, Y. K. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Correia, I., & Vala, J. (2003). When will a victim be secondarily victimized? The effect of observer’s belief in a just world, victim’s innocence and persistence of suffering. Social Justice Research, 16, 379–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D. (2002). Respect and cooperation in social dilemmas: The importance of feeling included. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(10), 1335–1341.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., & Blader, S. L. (2006). Why do people care about procedural fairness? The importance of belongingness in responding and attending to procedures. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(2), 211–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., & Tyler, T. R. (2005a). Am I respected or not? Inclusion and reputation as issues in group membership. Social Justice Research, 18(2), 121–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., & Tyler, T. R. (2005b). Managing group behavior: The interplay between procedural justice, sense of self, and cooperation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 151–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis for distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diekmann, K. A., Sondak, H., & Barsness, Z. I. (2007). Does fairness matter more to some than to others? The moderating role of workplace status on the relationship between procedural fairness perceptions and job satisfaction. Social Justice Research, 20(2), 161–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dube, L., & Guimond, S. (1986). Relative deprivation and social protest: The person-group issue. In J. M. Olson, C. P. Herman, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Relative deprivation and social comparison: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 4, pp. 201–216). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellemers, N., De Gilder, D., & Haslam, S. A. (2004). Motivating individuals and groups at work: A social identity perspective on leadership and group performance. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 459–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. (1992). An attributional and value analysis of deservingness in success and failure situations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 31(2), 125–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. (1994). Attitudes toward high achievers and reaction to their fall: Theory and research concerning tall poppies. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 26, pp. 1–73). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. (2002). Deservingness, entitlement, and reactions to outcomes. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 334–349). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. (2006). Deservingness and emotions: Applying the structural model of deservingness to the analysis of affective reactions to outcomes. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 38–73). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, N. (2008). Effects of observer’s own status on reactions to a high achiever’s failure: Deservingness, resentment, schadenfreude, and sympathy. Australian Journal of Psychology, 60(1), 31–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, R. H. G., & House, R. J. (1990). A test of the Vroom-Yetton model using manager and subordinate reports. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 362–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of voice and improvement on experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(2), 108–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A. (2005). The just world, charitable giving, and attitudes to disability. Personality and Individual Differences, 19(4), 577–583.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A., & Procter, E. (1992). Sphere-specific just world beliefs and attitudes to AIDS. Human Relations, 45, 265–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1993). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 79–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., & Folger, R. (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Basic group processes (pp. 235–256). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafer, C. L. (2000). Investment in long-term goals and commitment to just means drive the need to believe in a just world. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(9), 1059–1073.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafer, C. L. (2002). Why we reject innocent victims. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 109–126). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafer, C. L., & Begue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, developments, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 128–167.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hafer, C. L., & Olson, J. M. (1989). Beliefs in a just world and reactions to personal deprivation. Journal of Personality, 57(4), 799–823.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafer, C. L., & Olson, J. M. (2003). An analysis of empirical research on the scope of justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 311–323.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Healy, P. (2009, November 15). Advocacy Group Opposes ‘Miracle Worker’ Casting Choice. Retrieved from http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com.

  • Heilman, M. E., Hornstein, H. A., Cage, J. H., & Herschlag, J. K. (1984). Reactions to prescribed leader behavior as a function of role perspective: The case of the Vroom-Yetton model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 69, 50–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuer, L., Blumenthal, E., Douglas, A., & Weinblatt, T. (1999). A deservingness approach to respect as a relationally based fairness judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(10), 1279–1292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuer, L., Penrod, S., Hafer, C. L., & Cohn, I. (2002). The role of resource and relational concerns for procedural justice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(11), 1468–1482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuer, L., Penrod, S., & Kattan, A. (2007). The role of societal benefits and fairness concerns among decision makers and decision recipients. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 573–610.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heuer, L., & Stroessner, S. J. (2009). The multi-value nature of procedural justice. Unpublished Manuscript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houlden, P., LaTour, S., Walker, L., & Thibaut, J. (1978). Preference for modes of dispute resolution as a function of process and decision control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14(1), 13–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huo, Y. J., Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1996). Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns: Is separatism the problem; is assimilation the answer? Psychological Science, 7(1), 40–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T. (2001). Outgroup favoritism and the theory of system justification: A paradigm for investigating the effects of socioeconomic success on stereotype content. In G. Moskovitz (Ed.), Cognitive social psychology: The Princeton Symposium on the legacy and future of social cognition (pp. 89–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the Status Quo. Political Psychology, 25(6), 881–919.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karuza, J., Jr., & Carey, T. O. (1984). Relative preference and adaptiveness of behavioral blame for observers of rape victims. Journal of Personality, 52, 249–260.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M., & Brewer, M. B. (1984). Effects of group identity on resource use in a simulated commons dilemma. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1044–1057.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1965). Evaluation of performance as a function of performer’s reward and attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(4), 355–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85(5), 1030–1051.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). Observer’s reaction to the “innocent victim”: Compassion or rejection? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 203–210.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Tong, K., & Lind, E. A. (2007). Realpolitik versus fair process: Moderating effects of group identification on acceptance of political decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 476–489.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, P. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 952–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lissak, R. I., & Sheppard, B. H. (1983). Beyond fairness: The criterion problem in research on dispute intervention. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 45–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longmore, P. K. (1985). A note on language and the social identity of disabled people. American Behavioral Scientist, 28(3), 419–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis, W. R., Duck, J. M., Terry, D. J., Schuller, R. A., & Lalonde, R. N. (2007). Why do citizens want to keep refugees out? Threats, fairness and hostile norms in the treatment of asylum seekers. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(1), 53–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maes, J. (1994). Blaming the victim: Belief in control or belief in justice? Social Justice Research, 7, 69–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Major, B. (1994). From social inequality to personal entitlement: The role of social comparisons, legitimacy appraisals, and group membership. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 26, pp. 293–355). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, J. (1991). Pride against prejudice: transforming attitudes to disability. London: The Women’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagata, D. K. (1990). The Japanese-American internment: Perceptions of moral community, fairness, and redress. Journal of Social Issues, 46(1), 133–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagata, D. K. (1993). Moral exclusion and nonviolence: The Japanese American internment. In V. K. Kool (Ed.), Nonviolence: Social and psychological issues (pp. 85–93). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G. (2008). Outcomes as affirmation of membership value: Material compensation as an administrative response to procedural injustice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1270–1282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opotow, S. (1993). Animals and the scope of justice. Journal of Social Issues, 49, 71–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opotow, S. (1995). Drawing the line: Social categorization, moral exclusion, and the scope of justice. In B. B. Bunker & J. Z. Rubin (Eds.), Conflict, cooperation, and justice: Essays inspired by the work of Morton Deutsch (pp. 347–369). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opotow, S. (2007). Moral exclusion and torture: The ticking bomb scenario and the slippery ethical slope. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 13(4), 457–461.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peate, V. G., Platow, M. J., & Eggins, R. A. (2008). Collective voice and support for social protest among indigenous and non-indigenous Australians: Considering the role of procedural fairness in an intergroup conflict of interest. Australian Journal of Psychology, 60(3), 175–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 741–763.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schur, L., Kruse, D., & Blanck, P. (2005). Corporate culture and the employment of persons with disabilities. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23, 3–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sedekides, C., & Brewer, M. B. (2001). Individual self, relational self, collective self. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J., Levin, S., Federico, C., & Pratto, F. (2001). Legitimizing ideologies: The social dominance approach. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 307–331). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, C. H., & Lerner, M. J. (1968). Altruism as a search for justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 216–225.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L. J. (2002). Do the means always justify the ends, or do the ends sometimes justify the means? A value model of justice reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 588–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Mullen, E. (2008). Morality and justice: An expanded theoretical perspective and review. In K. A. Hedgvedt & J. Clay-Warner (Eds.), Advances in group processes. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L. J., & Houston, D. A. (2001). When due process is of no consequence: Moral mandates and presumed defendant guilt or innocence. Social Justice Research, 14(3), 305–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skitka, L. J., Winquist, J., & Hutchinson, S. (2003). Are outcome fairness and outcome favorability distinguishable psychological constructs? A meta-analytic review. Social Justice Research, 16(4), 309–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunshine, J., & Heuer, L. (2002). Deservingness and perceptions of procedural justice in citizen encounters with the police. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 397–415). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. (1982). The social psychology of inter-group relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In. S. Worchel (Ed.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago: Nelson Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, D. M., & McKirnan, D. J. (1984). A five stage model of intergroup relations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 291–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure. California Law Review, 66, 541–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25(3), 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1994). Psychological models of the justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(5), 850–863.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2001). Cooperation in organizations: A social identity perspective. In M. A. Hogg & D. J. Terry (Eds.), Social identity processes in organizational contexts (pp. 149–166). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Griffin, E. (1991). The influence of decision makers’ goals on their concerns about procedural justice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(20), 1629–1658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1990). Intrinsic versus community-based justice models: When does group membership matter? Journal of Social Issues, 46(1), 83–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–192). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., Lind, E. A., Ohbuchi, K., Sugawara, I., & Huo, Y. J. (1998). Conflict with outsiders: Disputing within and across cultural boundaries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(2), 137–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1999). Justice, social identity, and group processes. In T. R. Tyler, R. M. Kramer & O. P. John (Eds.), The psychology of the social self (pp. 223–264). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E., Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. W. (1976). New directions in equity research. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 1–42). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, A. C., & Baker, P. M. A. (2005). Disabilities and impairments: Strategies for workplace integration. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23, 143–160.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B. (1979). Human motivation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B., Perry, R., & Magnusson, J. (1988). An attributional analysis of reactions to stigmas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 738–748.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winnifred, L. R., & Taylor, D. M. (1999). From passive acceptance to social disruption: Towards an understanding of behavioural responses to discrimination. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 31(1), 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S. C., Taylor, D. M., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1990). Responding to membership in a disadvantaged group: From acceptance to collective protest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 994–1003.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 1–60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Barnard College, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10027-6598, USA

    Larry Heuer

Authors
  1. Larry Heuer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Larry Heuer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska/Lincoln, Burnett Hall 338, Lincoln, 68588-9296, Nebraska, USA

    Richard L. Wiener

  2. College of Law, University of Nebraska/Lincoln, North 42nd Street 1875, Lincoln, 68583-0902, Nebraska, USA

    Steven L. Willborn

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Heuer, L. (2011). Disability and Procedural Fairness in the Workplace. In: Wiener, R., Willborn, S. (eds) Disability and Aging Discrimination. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6293-5_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation