Skip to main content
Article
Moral Convictions Often Override Concerns About Procedural Fairness: A Reply to Napier and Tyler.
Social Justice Research (2008)
  • Linda J. Skitka, The University of Illinois at Chicago
  • Elizabeth Mullen, Stanford University
Abstract
Napier and Tyler (this issue) question whether moral convictions about outcomes really override the influence of procedural fairness (PF) on fairness judgments and decision acceptance. The empirical answer to this question is “yes.” When people have strong moral convictions about outcomes, perceptions of outcome fairness and decision acceptance are primarily shaped by whether the morally “correct” outcomes are achieved. Pre-decision perceptions of PF have surprisingly little or no effect on these judgments. That said, pre-outcome perceptions of PF sometimes predict post-outcome perceptions of PF, even when people have morally vested outcome preferences. We provide further details supporting the validity and superiority of our data analytic approach and argue that our original conclusions were justified.
Keywords
  • Morality,
  • Moral mandate,
  • Justice,
  • Fairness,
  • Procedural fairness,
  • Procedural justice,
  • Outcome fairness,
  • Obedience to authority
Disciplines
Publication Date
December, 2008
DOI
10.1007/s11211-008-0085-9
Publisher Statement
SJSU users: use the following link to login and access the article via SJSU databases.
Citation Information
Linda J. Skitka and Elizabeth Mullen. "Moral Convictions Often Override Concerns About Procedural Fairness: A Reply to Napier and Tyler." Social Justice Research Vol. 21 Iss. 4 (2008) p. 529 - 546 ISSN: 0885-7466
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/elizabeth-mullen/9/