IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v41y2012i1p240-245.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Direct and Indirect Measures of Just Rewards

Author

Listed:
  • Barry Markovsky
  • Kimmo Eriksson

Abstract

We offer the first comparison between “direct†and “indirect†methods for measuring perceptions of distributive justice in reward allocations. The direct method simply asks respondents what they would consider to be a fair salary for a particular person in a given set of circumstances. In contrast, the indirect method infers fair salaries from respondents’ judgments about the relative unfairness of hypothetical salaries. The particular indirect method that we will assess is a vignette survey technique pioneered by Jasso and Rossi (1977) and used in a number of more recent publications. The vignettes describe characteristics of a hypothetical employee, with the objective of deriving what respondents believe to be the just reward for that employee. Our experimental test suggests that the two methods yield incompatible results and that neither is immune to bias. The indirect method also suffers from a type of specification error that leads to untenable results. We conclude by suggesting directions for new research to gain a better understanding of these problems and, ultimately, to circumvent them.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Barry Markovsky & Kimmo Eriksson, 2012. "Comparing Direct and Indirect Measures of Just Rewards," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(1), pages 240-245, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:41:y:2012:i:1:p:240-245
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124112448361
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124112448361
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124112448361?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of 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. Buckler, Kevin & Unnever, James D., 2008. "Racial and ethnic perceptions of injustice: Testing the core hypotheses of comparative conflict theory," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 270-278, July.
    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. Kimmo Eriksson & Brent Simpson, 2013. "Editorial Decisions May Perpetuate Belief in Invalid Research Findings," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-6, September.
    2. 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. Feldmann, Marcel, 2010. "A Factorial Survey on Fair Leadership Behavior and the Role of Superiors," MPRA Paper 26009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Wietzke, Frank-Borge, 2024. "Perceptions of social class in Africa. Results from a conjoint experiment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    3. Frodermann, Corinna & Auspurg, Katrin & Hinz, Thomas & Bähr, Sebastian & Abraham, Martin & Gundert, Stefanie & Bethmann, Arne, 2013. "Das Faktorielle Survey-Modul zur Stellenannahmebereitschaft im PASS : 5. Erhebungswelle (2011)," FDZ Methodenreport 201305_de, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    4. Guillermina Jasso, 2012. "Safeguarding Justice Research," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(1), pages 217-239, February.
    5. Kim, Sehoon & Connerton, Timothy Paul & Park, Cheongyeul, 2022. "Transforming the automotive retail: Drivers for customers' omnichannel BOPS (Buy Online & Pick up in Store) behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 411-425.
    6. Martin Abraham & Natascha Nisic, 2012. "A simple mobility game for couples’ migration decisions and some quasi-experimental evidence1," Rationality and Society, , vol. 24(2), pages 168-197, May.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Carsten Sauer & Katrin Auspurg & Thomas Hinz & Stefan Liebig & Jürgen Schupp, 2014. "Method Effects in Factorial Surveys: An Analysis of Respondents' Comments, Interviewers' Assessments, and Response Behavior," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 629, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    11. 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.
    12. Van Belle, Eva & Caers, Ralf & De Couck, Marijke & Di Stasio, Valentina & Baert, Stijn, 2017. "Why Is Unemployment Duration a Sorting Criterion in Hiring?," IZA Discussion Papers 10876, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Finger, Claudia, 2016. "Institutional constraints and the translation of college aspirations into intentions—Evidence from a factorial survey," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46, pages 112-128.
    14. Lulu P. Shi & Christian Imdorf & Robin Samuel & Stefan Sacchi, 2018. "How unemployment scarring affects skilled young workers: evidence from a factorial survey of Swiss recruiters," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 52(1), pages 1-15, December.
    15. Van Borm, Hannah & Burn, Ian & Baert, Stijn, 2021. "What Does a Job Candidate's Age Signal to Employers?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    16. repec:iab:iabfme:201305(de is not listed on IDEAS
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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).
    20. 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.
    21. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:240-245. 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.