To Justify or Excuse?: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Effects of Explanations

The authors used R. Folger and R. Cropanzano's (1998 , 2001 ) fairness theory to derive predictions about the effects of explanation provision and explanation adequacy on justice judgments and cooperation, retaliation, and withdrawal responses. The authors also used the theory to identify poten...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of applied psychology 2003-06, Vol.88 (3), p.444-458
Main Authors: Shaw, John C, Wild, Eric, Colquitt, Jason A
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Biological and medical sciences
Cooperation
Decision making
Discrimination
Employees
Explanation
Explanations
Fairness
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Human
Humans
Job performance
Judgement
Judgment
Justice
Management
Meta-analysis
Occupational psychology
Organization and management. Professional relation
Organizational performance
Organizations
Perceptions
Psychological Theory
Psychology
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychophysiology
Redundancy
Retaliation
Social Justice
Studies
Theories
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The authors used R. Folger and R. Cropanzano's (1998 , 2001 ) fairness theory to derive predictions about the effects of explanation provision and explanation adequacy on justice judgments and cooperation, retaliation, and withdrawal responses. The authors also used the theory to identify potential moderators of those effects, including the type of explanation (justification vs. excuse), outcome favorability, and study context. The authors' predictions were tested by using meta-analyses of 54 independent samples. The results showed strong effects of explanations on both the justice and response variables. Moreover, explanations were more beneficial when they took the form of excuses rather than justifications, when they were given after unfavorable outcomes, and when they were given in contexts with instrumental, relational, and moral implications.
ISSN:0021-9010
1939-1854
DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.444