IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v41y2012i1p217-239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Safeguarding Justice Research

Author

Listed:
  • Guillermina Jasso

Abstract

What do people think is just? A basic element in justice research is the just reward –the observer’s idea about what is just for a particular rewardee. But discerning the just reward is not easy; much intervenes between the idea and its expression. Justice theory suggests four classes of measures, one direct and three indirect, each class encompassing several designs for data collection and data analysis. This paper examines direct designs and one of the three classes of indirect designs–that based on the justice evaluation–and revisits the longstanding challenge of justice-evaluation-based indirect designs, namely, to reduce or eliminate the correlation between the actual reward and the unobserved just reward. The paper presents statistical, algebraic, and empirical evidence to show how the factorial survey, with its layers of randomization, protects against bias, mitigating the correlation in the one-reward design and destroying it in the multiple-reward design. Of course, the search for better measures continues. As with length and weight, new theory and new technology will bring new and better measures of the just reward.

Suggested Citation

  • Guillermina Jasso, 2012. "Safeguarding Justice Research," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(1), pages 217-239, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:41:y:2012:i:1:p:217-239
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124112437711
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124112437711
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124112437711?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guillermina Jasso, 2006. "Factorial Survey Methods for Studying Beliefs and Judgments," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 34(3), pages 334-423, February.
    2. repec:fth:harver:1518 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Guillermina Jasso, 2009. "A New Model of Wage Determination and Wage Inequality," Rationality and Society, , vol. 21(1), pages 113-168, February.
    4. Chamberlain, Gary, 1990. "Arthur S. Goldberger and Latent Variables in Econometrics: Distinguished Fellow," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 125-152, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Katrin Auspurg & Annette Jäckle, 2017. "First Equals Most Important? Order Effects in Vignette-Based Measurement," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(3), pages 490-539, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wietzke, Frank-Borge, 2024. "Perceptions of social class in Africa. Results from a conjoint experiment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    2. Valentine, Nicole & Verdes-Tennant, Emese & Bonsel, Gouke, 2015. "Health systems' responsiveness and reporting behaviour: Multilevel analysis of the influence of individual-level factors in 64 countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 152-160.
    3. Bidhan L. Parmar & Adrian Keevil & Andrew C. Wicks, 2019. "People and Profits: The Impact of Corporate Objectives on Employees’ Need Satisfaction at Work," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 13-33, January.
    4. Élisabeth Tovar & Matthieu Bunel, 2021. "Attitudes on past-in-present educational discrimination. Insights from a representative factorial survey," EconomiX Working Papers 2021-28, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    5. Barry Markovsky & Kimmo Eriksson, 2012. "Comparing Direct and Indirect Measures of Just Rewards," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(1), pages 199-216, February.
    6. Kirsten Martin, 2012. "Diminished or Just Different? A Factorial Vignette Study of Privacy as a Social Contract," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 111(4), pages 519-539, December.
    7. Kirsten Martin & Ari Waldman, 2023. "Are Algorithmic Decisions Legitimate? The Effect of Process and Outcomes on Perceptions of Legitimacy of AI Decisions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 653-670, March.
    8. Van Borm, Hannah & Baert, Stijn, 2022. "Diving in the minds of recruiters: What triggers gender stereotypes in hiring?," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1083, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    9. Alexandra Mergener & Tobias Maier, 2019. "Immigrants’ Chances of Being Hired at Times of Skill Shortages: Results from a Factorial Survey Experiment Among German Employers," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 155-177, February.
    10. David Heise, 2015. "Determinants of normative processes: comparison of two empirical methods of specification," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 2559-2576, November.
    11. Azadegan, Arash & Golara, Sina & Kach, Andrew & Mousavi, Nasim, 2018. "Corporate environmental investments: A cross-national study on managerial decision making," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 47-64.
    12. Carlo Michael Knotz & Mia Katharina Gandenberger & Flavia Fossati & Giuliano Bonoli, 2022. "A Recast Framework for Welfare Deservingness Perceptions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 159(3), pages 927-943, February.
    13. Van Borm, Hannah & Burn, Ian & Baert, Stijn, 2021. "What Does a Job Candidate's Age Signal to Employers?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    14. Katerusha, Dmytro, 2021. "Barriers to the use of recycled concrete from the perspective of executing companies and possible solution approaches - case study Germany and Switzerland," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    15. Eva Van Belle & Ralf Caers & Marijke De Couck & Valentina Di Stasio & Stijn Baert, 2019. "The Signal of Applying for a Job Under a Vacancy Referral Scheme," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 251-274, April.
    16. Liebe, Ulf & Bartczak, Anna & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "A turbine is not only a turbine: The role of social context and fairness characteristics for the local acceptance of wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 300-308.
    17. Guillermina Jasso, 2009. "A New Model of Wage Determination and Wage Inequality," Rationality and Society, , vol. 21(1), pages 113-168, February.
    18. Blaine G. Robbins, 2017. "Status, identity, and ability in the formation of trust," Rationality and Society, , vol. 29(4), pages 408-448, November.
    19. Martin, Kirsten, 2018. "The penalty for privacy violations: How privacy violations impact trust online," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 103-116.
    20. Hannah Van Borm & Louis Lippens & Stijn Baert, 2022. "An Arab, an Asian, and a Black guy walk into a job interview: ethnic stigma in hiring after controlling for social class," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 22/1054, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:41:y:2012:i:1:p:217-239. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.