先读 图书 有声 广场 视频 期刊 会议 小站
主题知识库
购物车 兑换码 书房 消息 (0)
您好，请登录
个人中心 退出登录
主题知识库
马克思主义研究数据库 中国市场化指数数据库 社会学研究数据库 清前期云南督抚边疆事务奏疏知识库 英藏敦煌社會歷史文獻釋錄数据库 党史党建专题数据库 国别区域专题库 世界文学期刊 殷墟出土文物专题库 数字学术项目库 体育研究发展数据库 社科院文学研究所剪报资料库
首页  >  中国社会心理学评论（第21辑）  >  详情

论文

程序公平性和结果有利性对儿童程序正义判断、结果满意度与权威接纳意愿的影响

摘要

本研究通过权威决策假设情境实验任务，探讨程序公平性和结果有利性对小学高年级儿童程序正义判断的影响，以及程序正义判断在程序公平性与结果满意度之间、程序公平性与权威接纳意愿之间的中介作用。344名小学五年级儿童（M=10.76岁）被随机分派到3（程序公平性：公平、不公平、不确定）×3（结果有利性：有利、不利、不确定/候补）被试间设计的各处理组，随后完成程序正义判断、结果满意度和权威接纳意愿的测量。结果显示，小学高年级儿童对权威决策的程序公平性敏感，程序公平条件下的程序正义判断显著高于程序不公平和程序不确定条件下的程序正义判断；结果有利性对程序正义判断主效应显著，结果有利条件显著高于结果不利条件，但与结果不确定/候补条件无显著差异；程序公平性和结果有利性的交互作用显著，在程序确定（公平或不公平）条件下，结果不确定/候补时的程序正义判断与结果有利时相似，而在程序不确定条件下，结果不确定/候补时的程序正义判断则与结果不利时相似。程序公平性对结果满意度和权威接纳意愿的主效应均显著，程序正义判断在程序公平性与结果满意度之间、程序公平性与权威接纳意愿之间均起中介作用。

关键词

道德发展 程序公平性 结果有利性 程序正义判断 权威接纳意愿

作者

徐华女 ，武汉大学哲学学院心理学系讲师。
洪慧芳 ，泉州市教育科学研究所教研员。

参考文献 查看全部 ↓
  • 陈瑞、郑毓煌、刘文静，2013，《中介效应分析：原理、程序、Bootstrap方法及其应用》，《营养科学学报》第4期。
  • 徐华女、洪慧芳，2020，《外来工子女学习动机的提升路径：感知教师正义视角》，《全球教育展望》第5期。
  • 徐华女、黄蕴智，2014，《团体分配中儿童对程序正义与分配正义概念的掌握》，《心理学进展》第2期。
  • Blader，S.L.（2007）. What determines people’s fairness judgments？Identification and outcomes influence procedural justice evaluations under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology，43（6），986-994.
  • Blader，S.L.，& Tyler，T.R.（2015）. “Relational models of procedural justice.” In R.S. Cropanzano & M.L.Ambrose（eds.），The Oxford handbook of justice in the workplace，pp.351-370. New York：Oxford University Press.
  • Brockner，J.（2002）. Making sense of procedural fairness：How high procedural fairness can reduce or heighten the influence of outcome favorability. Academy of Management Review，27（1），58-76.
  • Brockner，J.，Fishman，A.Y.，Reb，J.，Goldman，B.，Spiegel，S.，& Garden，C.（2007）. Procedural fairness，outcome favorability，and judgments of an authority’s responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology，92（6），1657-1671.
  • Darley，J.M.，& Shultz，T.R.（1990）. Moral judgments：Their content and acquisition. Annual Review of Psychology，41（1），525-556.
  • Dunham，Y.，Durkin，A.，& Tyler，T.R.（2018）. The development of a preference for procedural justice for self and others. Scientific Reports，8（1），1-8.
  • Duska，R.，& Whelan，M.（1975）. Moral development：A guide to Piaget and Kohlberg. New York：Paulist Press.
  • Fogan，J.，& Tyler，T.R.（2005）. Legal socialization of children and adolescents. Social Justice Research，18（3），217-241.
  • Fry，P.S.，& Corfield，V.K.（1983）. Children’s judgments of authority figures with respect to outcome and procedural fairness. The Journal of Genetic Psychology，143（2），241-250.
  • Gold，L.J.，Darley，J.M.，Hilton，J.L.，& Zanna，M.P.（1984）. Children’s perceptions of procedural justice. Child Development，55（5），1752-1759.
  • Gouveia-Pereira，M.，Vala，J.，Palmonari，A.，& Rubini，M.（2003）. School experience，relational justice and legitimation of institutional. European Journal of Psychology of Education，18（3），309-325.
  • Grocke，F.，Rossano，F.，& Tomasello，M.（2015）. Procedural justice in children：Preschoolers accept unequal resource distributions if the procedure provides equal opportunities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology，140，197-210.
  • Grocke，P.，Rossano，F.，& Tomasello，M.（2018）. Young children are more willing to accept group decisions in which they have had a voice. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology，166，67-78.
  • Habermas，J.（1990）. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Translated by C. Lenhardt & S.W.Nicholsen，Cambridge：MIT Press.
  • Hayes，A.F.（2013）. Introduction to Mediation，Moderation，and Conditional Process Analysis：A Regression-based Approach. New York：Guilford Press.
  • Hicks，A.J.，& Lawrence，J.A.（1993）. Children’s criteria for procedural justice：Developing a young people’s procedural justice scale. Social Justice Research，6（2），163-182.
  • Hinds，L.（2007）. Building police-youth relationships：The importance of procedural justice. Youth Justice，7（3），195-209.
  • Karmiloff-Smith，A.（1992）. Beyond Modularity：A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science. Cambridge：MIT Press.
  • Kazemi，A.（2016）. Examining theinterplay of justice perceptions，motivation，and school achievement among secondary school students. Social Justice Research，29（1），103-118.
  • Kim，W.C.，& Mauborgne，R.A.（1993）. Procedural justice，attitudes，and subsidiary top management compliance with multinationals’ corporate strategic decisions. Academy of Management Journal，36（3），502-526.
  • Leventhal，G.S.（1980）. “What should be done with equity theory？New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships.” In K.Gergen，M.Greenberg，& R.Willis（eds.），Social Exchange，pp.27-55. New York：Plenum.
  • Lind，E.A.（1995）. “Justice and authority in organizations.” In R.Cropanzano & K.M. Kacmar（eds.），Politics，Justice，and Support：Managing the Social Climate of Work Organizations，pp.83-96. Westport：Quorum.
  • Lind，E.A.（2001）. “Fairness heuristic theory：Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations.” In J.Greenberg & R.Cropanzano（eds.），Advances in Organizational Justice，pp.56-88. Stanford：Stanford University Press.
  • Lind，E.A.，Kray，L.，& Thompson，L.（2001）. Primacy effects in justice judgments：Testing predictions from fairness heuristic theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes，85（2），189-210.
  • Lukauskaitė，V.，& Daugirdienė，A.（2015）. 5-8-year-old children’s perceived procedural justice. Ugdymo Psichologija（Educational Psychology），26，27-43.
  • McComas，K.，Tuite，L.S.，Waks，L.，& Sherman，L.A.（2007）. Predicting satisfaction and outcome acceptance with advisory committee meetings：The role of procedural justice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology，37（5），905-927.
  • Myyry，L.，& Helkama，K.（2002）. Moral reasoning and the use of procedural justice rules in hypothetical and real-life dilemmas. Social Justice Research，15（4），373-391.
  • Nelson，N.，Shechter，D.，& Ben-Ari，R.（2014）. Procedural justice and conflict management at school. Negotiation Journal，30（4），393-419.
  • Piaget，J.（1948）. The Moral Judgment of the Child. New York：Free Press.
  • Reisig，M.D.，& Lloyd，C.（2009）. Procedural justice，police legitimacy，and helping the police fight crime：Results from a survey of Jamaican adolescents. Police Quarterly，12（1），42-62.
  • Shaw，A.，& Olson，K.R.（2014）. Fairness as partiality aversion：The development of procedural justice. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology，119，40-53.
  • Thibaut，J.W.，& Walker，L.（1978）. A theory of procedure. California Law Review，66，541-566.
  • Tyler，T.R.（1984）. The role of perceived injustice in defendant’s evaluations of their courtroom experience. Law and Society Review，18，51-74.
  • Tyler，T.R.（1997）. The psychology of legitimacy：A relational perspective on voluntary deference to authorities. Personality and Social Psychology Review，1（4），323-345.
  • Tyler，T.R.（2000）. Social justice：Outcome and procedure. International Journal of Psychology，35（2），117-125.
  • Tyler，T.R.，& Blader，S.L.（2003）. The group engagement model：Procedural justice，social identity，and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review，7（4），349-361.
  • Tyler，T.R.，& Degoey，P.（1995）. Collective restraint in social dilemmas：Procedural justice and social identification effects on support for authorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology，69（3），482-497.
  • Tyler，T.R.，& Lind，E.A.（1992）. “A relational model of authority in groups.” In M. Zanna（ed.），Advances in Experimental Social Psychology，25，115-191. New York：Academic Press.
  • Tyler，T.R.，Rasinski，K.A.，& Spodick，N.（1985）. Influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders：Exploring the meaning of process control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology，48（1），72-81.
  • Van den Bos，K.（1999）. What are we talking about when we talk about no-voice procedures？On the psychology of the fair outcome effect. Journalof Experimental Social Psychology，35（6），560-577.
  • Van den Bos，K.，& Lind，E.A.（2002）. “Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments.” In M.Zanna（ed.），Advances in Experimentalsocial Psychology，34，1-60. San Diego：Academic Press.
  • Van den Bos，K.，Vermunt，R.，& Wilke，H.A.M.（1997）. Procedural and distributive justice：What is fair depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology，72（1），95-104.
  • Zhao，X.，Lynch，J.G.，& Chen，Q.（2010）. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny：Myths and truths aboutmediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research，37（2），197-206.
  • 陈瑞、郑毓煌、刘文静，2013，《中介效应分析：原理、程序、Bootstrap方法及其应用》，《营养科学学报》第4期。
  • 徐华女、洪慧芳，2020，《外来工子女学习动机的提升路径：感知教师正义视角》，《全球教育展望》第5期。
  • 徐华女、黄蕴智，2014，《团体分配中儿童对程序正义与分配正义概念的掌握》，《心理学进展》第2期。
  • Blader，S.L.（2007）. What determines people’s fairness judgments？Identification and outcomes influence procedural justice evaluations under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology，43（6），986-994.
  • Blader，S.L.，& Tyler，T.R.（2015）. “Relational models of procedural justice.” In R.S. Cropanzano & M.L.Ambrose（eds.），The Oxford handbook of justice in the workplace，pp.351-370. New York：Oxford University Press.
  • Brockner，J.（2002）. Making sense of procedural fairness：How high procedural fairness can reduce or heighten the influence of outcome favorability. Academy of Management Review，27（1），58-76.
  • Brockner，J.，Fishman，A.Y.，Reb，J.，Goldman，B.，Spiegel，S.，& Garden，C.（2007）. Procedural fairness，outcome favorability，and judgments of an authority’s responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology，92（6），1657-1671.
  • Darley，J.M.，& Shultz，T.R.（1990）. Moral judgments：Their content and acquisition. Annual Review of Psychology，41（1），525-556.
  • Dunham，Y.，Durkin，A.，& Tyler，T.R.（2018）. The development of a preference for procedural justice for self and others. Scientific Reports，8（1），1-8.
  • Duska，R.，& Whelan，M.（1975）. Moral development：A guide to Piaget and Kohlberg. New York：Paulist Press.
  • Fogan，J.，& Tyler，T.R.（2005）. Legal socialization of children and adolescents. Social Justice Research，18（3），217-241.
  • Fry，P.S.，& Corfield，V.K.（1983）. Children’s judgments of authority figures with respect to outcome and procedural fairness. The Journal of Genetic Psychology，143（2），241-250.
  • Gold，L.J.，Darley，J.M.，Hilton，J.L.，& Zanna，M.P.（1984）. Children’s perceptions of procedural justice. Child Development，55（5），1752-1759.
  • Gouveia-Pereira，M.，Vala，J.，Palmonari，A.，& Rubini，M.（2003）. School experience，relational justice and legitimation of institutional. European Journal of Psychology of Education，18（3），309-325.
  • Grocke，F.，Rossano，F.，& Tomasello，M.（2015）. Procedural justice in children：Preschoolers accept unequal resource distributions if the procedure provides equal opportunities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology，140，197-210.
  • Grocke，P.，Rossano，F.，& Tomasello，M.（2018）. Young children are more willing to accept group decisions in which they have had a voice. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology，166，67-78.
  • Habermas，J.（1990）. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Translated by C. Lenhardt & S.W.Nicholsen，Cambridge：MIT Press.
  • Hayes，A.F.（2013）. Introduction to Mediation，Moderation，and Conditional Process Analysis：A Regression-based Approach. New York：Guilford Press.
  • Hicks，A.J.，& Lawrence，J.A.（1993）. Children’s criteria for procedural justice：Developing a young people’s procedural justice scale. Social Justice Research，6（2），163-182.
  • Hinds，L.（2007）. Building police-youth relationships：The importance of procedural justice. Youth Justice，7（3），195-209.
  • Karmiloff-Smith，A.（1992）. Beyond Modularity：A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science. Cambridge：MIT Press.
  • Kazemi，A.（2016）. Examining theinterplay of justice perceptions，motivation，and school achievement among secondary school students. Social Justice Research，29（1），103-118.
  • Kim，W.C.，& Mauborgne，R.A.（1993）. Procedural justice，attitudes，and subsidiary top management compliance with multinationals’ corporate strategic decisions. Academy of Management Journal，36（3），502-526.
  • Leventhal，G.S.（1980）. “What should be done with equity theory？New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships.” In K.Gergen，M.Greenberg，& R.Willis（eds.），Social Exchange，pp.27-55. New York：Plenum.
  • Lind，E.A.（1995）. “Justice and authority in organizations.” In R.Cropanzano & K.M. Kacmar（eds.），Politics，Justice，and Support：Managing the Social Climate of Work Organizations，pp.83-96. Westport：Quorum.
  • Lind，E.A.（2001）. “Fairness heuristic theory：Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations.” In J.Greenberg & R.Cropanzano（eds.），Advances in Organizational Justice，pp.56-88. Stanford：Stanford University Press.
  • Lind，E.A.，Kray，L.，& Thompson，L.（2001）. Primacy effects in justice judgments：Testing predictions from fairness heuristic theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes，85（2），189-210.
  • Lukauskaitė，V.，& Daugirdienė，A.（2015）. 5-8-year-old children’s perceived procedural justice. Ugdymo Psichologija（Educational Psychology），26，27-43.
  • McComas，K.，Tuite，L.S.，Waks，L.，& Sherman，L.A.（2007）. Predicting satisfaction and outcome acceptance with advisory committee meetings：The role of procedural justice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology，37（5），905-927.
  • Myyry，L.，& Helkama，K.（2002）. Moral reasoning and the use of procedural justice rules in hypothetical and real-life dilemmas. Social Justice Research，15（4），373-391.
  • Nelson，N.，Shechter，D.，& Ben-Ari，R.（2014）. Procedural justice and conflict management at school. Negotiation Journal，30（4），393-419.
  • Piaget，J.（1948）. The Moral Judgment of the Child. New York：Free Press.
  • Reisig，M.D.，& Lloyd，C.（2009）. Procedural justice，police legitimacy，and helping the police fight crime：Results from a survey of Jamaican adolescents. Police Quarterly，12（1），42-62.
  • Shaw，A.，& Olson，K.R.（2014）. Fairness as partiality aversion：The development of procedural justice. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology，119，40-53.
  • Thibaut，J.W.，& Walker，L.（1978）. A theory of procedure. California Law Review，66，541-566.
  • Tyler，T.R.（1984）. The role of perceived injustice in defendant’s evaluations of their courtroom experience. Law and Society Review，18，51-74.
  • Tyler，T.R.（1997）. The psychology of legitimacy：A relational perspective on voluntary deference to authorities. Personality and Social Psychology Review，1（4），323-345.
  • Tyler，T.R.（2000）. Social justice：Outcome and procedure. International Journal of Psychology，35（2），117-125.
  • Tyler，T.R.，& Blader，S.L.（2003）. The group engagement model：Procedural justice，social identity，and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review，7（4），349-361.
  • Tyler，T.R.，& Degoey，P.（1995）. Collective restraint in social dilemmas：Procedural justice and social identification effects on support for authorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology，69（3），482-497.
  • Tyler，T.R.，& Lind，E.A.（1992）. “A relational model of authority in groups.” In M. Zanna（ed.），Advances in Experimental Social Psychology，25，115-191. New York：Academic Press.
  • Tyler，T.R.，Rasinski，K.A.，& Spodick，N.（1985）. Influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders：Exploring the meaning of process control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology，48（1），72-81.
  • Van den Bos，K.（1999）. What are we talking about when we talk about no-voice procedures？On the psychology of the fair outcome effect. Journalof Experimental Social Psychology，35（6），560-577.
  • Van den Bos，K.，& Lind，E.A.（2002）. “Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments.” In M.Zanna（ed.），Advances in Experimentalsocial Psychology，34，1-60. San Diego：Academic Press.
  • Van den Bos，K.，Vermunt，R.，& Wilke，H.A.M.（1997）. Procedural and distributive justice：What is fair depends more on what comes first than on what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology，72（1），95-104.
  • Zhao，X.，Lynch，J.G.，& Chen，Q.（2010）. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny：Myths and truths aboutmediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research，37（2），197-206.

程序公平性和结果有利性对儿童程序正义判断、结果满意度与权威接纳意愿的影响

可试读20%内容 PDF阅读 阅读器阅览

试读已结束，剩余80%未读

¥12.95 查看全文 >

VIP免费

检索正文关键字

论文目录

  • 一 引言
    1. （一）程序正义与权威关系模型
    2. （二）儿童的程序正义概念以及儿童与权威之间的关系
      1. 1.儿童程序正义概念的研究背景
      2. 2.儿童程序正义概念的早期发展
      3. 3.权威决策程序公平性对儿童程序正义判断和权威接纳意愿的影响
      4. 4.结果有利性和程序公平性对儿童程序正义判断的交互作用
      5. 5.以往儿童程序正义概念发展研究的不足之处
    3. （三）研究目的和假设
  • 二 方法
    1. （一）被试
    2. （二）实验设计和程序
      1. 1.自变量的操纵
      2. 2.中介变量的测量
      3. 3.因变量的测量
    3. （三）统计分析
  • 三 结果
    1. （一）初步分析和操纵检验
    2. （二）程序公平性和结果有利性对程序正义判断的影响
    3. （三）程序公平性和结果有利性对结果满意度和权威接纳意愿的影响
    4. （四）程序正义判断的中介作用
  • 四 讨论
    1. （一）小学高年级儿童的程序正义判断
    2. （二）程序公平性对结果满意度和权威接纳意愿的影响
    3. （三）研究意义、局限和展望
  • 五 结论

论文图片/图表

相关文献

受害者正义感与人际宽恕：社会价值取向的作用

受害者正义感与背侧脑岛静息态功能连接的关联研究

宽容对小学生外化问题行为的影响：友谊质量、敌意归因的中介作用

人心秩序：敬畏特质及其对腐败行为意向的抑制效应

个体化与新家庭主义视角下的孝道观念演变

父母控制对高中生亲社会行为的影响：情绪调节策略的中介作用

素食动机、行为反馈与应对策略初探：一项质性研究

道德声誉在第三方惩罚违规者行为认知中的作用

程序公平性和结果有利性对儿童程序正义判断、结果满意度与权威接纳意愿的影响

宜人性之殇：收入不平等对国家宜人性人格与国民健康指标间关系的系列负性调节效应

不幸的道德：运气越差越功利主义

自我类别化对社会参与的影响

查看更多>>>