Dominance analysis of two measures of organizational justice

Abstract

Purpose

This article aims to examine the criterion‐related validity of two sets of commonly used measures of organizational justice.

Design/methodology/approach

Regression‐based dominance analysis is used on self‐report data provided by 214 working college students.

Findings

The three‐dimension measure of organizational justice by Moorman was compared to the four‐dimension measure of Colquitt in the prediction of Colquitt's own outcomes. Results suggest that Moorman's measures may dominate Colquitt's measures on some outcomes.

Practical implications

Practitioners are urged to give renewed consideration to Moorman's scales when predicting outcomes, as it appears that this three‐factor measure of organizational justice may outperform the four‐factor measure in some instances.

Social implications

Organizations may find Moorman's parsimonious representation of justice more useful than Colquitt's version for explaining the nuances of perceptual differences regarding fairness and justice in the workplace.

Originality/value

This study is, to the authors' knowledge, the first to compare Colquitt's measures of justice with Moorman's measures on a subscale‐by‐subscale basis.

Citation

Miller, B.K., Konopaske, R. and Byrne, Z.S. (2012), "Dominance analysis of two measures of organizational justice", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 264-282. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683941211205817