Justice judgments: Individual self-insight and between- and within-person consistency

Abstract

We use the method of policy capturing to address three open-ended questions regarding how people judge the fairness of events. First, do people differ in how they judge whether a situation is fair or unfair; second, are fairness judgments stable within-person; and, third, how much insight do people have into how they make fairness judgments? To investigate these questions, we used the method of policy capturing and a representative design that samples situations as well as participants. Forty-nine employees rated the global fairness of 56 performance appraisals sampled from their own organization (N = 2,744 situations), and regression methods were used to infer their judgment policy from their choices. We found that people differed greatly in how they judged fairness but used quite consistent policies across similar situations. Participants also provided self-reports of their judgment policies, and comparisons of these self-reports with actual policies revealed limited levels of self-insight.