Publisher Summary
This chapter outlines the two basic routes to persuasion. One route is based on the thoughtful consideration of arguments central to the issue, whereas the other is based on the affective associations or simple inferences tied to peripheral cues in the persuasion context. This chapter discusses a wide variety of variables that proved instrumental in affecting the elaboration likelihood, and thus the route to persuasion. One of the basic postulates of the Elaboration Likelihood Model—that variables may affect persuasion by increasing or decreasing scrutiny of message arguments—has been highly useful in accounting for the effects of a seemingly diverse list of variables. The reviewers of the attitude change literature have been disappointed with the many conflicting effects observed, even for ostensibly simple variables. The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) attempts to place these many conflicting results and theories under one conceptual umbrella by specifying the major processes underlying persuasion and indicating the way many of the traditionally studied variables and theories relate to these basic processes. The ELM may prove useful in providing a guiding set of postulates from which to interpret previous work and in suggesting new hypotheses to be explored in future research.

/pdf/the-elaboration-likelihood-model-of-persuasion-3y2y5dyvfe.pdf

The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion

Introduction 1. Woman's Place in Man's Life Cycle 2. Images of Relationship 3. Concepts of Self and Morality 4. Crisis and Transition 5. Women's Rights and Women's Judgment 6. Visions of Maturity References Index of Study Participants General Index

In a Different Voice. Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA (Harvard University Press) 1982.

This paper presents a model of team learning and tests it in a multimethod field study. It introduces the construct of team psychological safety—a shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking—and models the effects of team psychological safety and team efficacy together on learning and performance in organizational work teams. Results of a study of 51 work teams in a manufacturing company, measuring antecedent, process, and outcome variables, show that team psychological safety is associated with learning behavior, but team efficacy is not, when controlling for team psychological safety. As predicted, learning behavior mediates between team psychological safety and team performance. The results support an integrative perspective in which both team structures, such as context support and team leader coaching, and shared beliefs shape team outcomes.

/pdf/psychological-safety-and-learning-behavior-in-work-teams-igq2jhsmtc.pdf

Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams

INDIVIDUAL PROCESSES IN INTERGROUP BEHAVIOR 3 From Individual to Group Impressions 3 GROUP MEMBERSHIP AND INTERGROUP BEHAVIOR 7 The Scope and Range of Ethnocentrism 8 The Development of Ethnocentrism 9 Intergroup Conflict and Competition 12 Interpersonal and intergroup behavior 13 Intergroup conflict and group cohesion 15 Power and status in intergroup behavior 16 Social Categorization a d Intergroup Behavior 20 Social categorization: cognitions, values, and groups 20 Social categorization a d intergroup discrimination 23 Social identity and social comparison 24 THE REDUCTION FINTERGROUP DISCRIMINATION 27 Intergroup Cooperation and Superordinate Goals " 28 Intergroup Contact. 28 Multigroup Membership and "lndividualizat~’on" of the Outgroup 29 SUMMARY 30

Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations

The field of organizationa l justice continues to be marked by several important research questions, including the size of relationships among justice dimensions, the relative importance of different justice criteria, and the unique effects of justice dimensions on key outcomes. To address such questions, the authors conducted a meta-analytic review of 183 justice studies. The results suggest that although different justice dimensions are moderately to highly related, they contribute incremental variance explained in fairness perceptions. The results also illustrate the overall and unique relationships among distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice and several organizational outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commitment, evaluation of authority, organizational citizenship behavior, withdrawal, performance). These findings are reviewed in terms of their implications for future research on organizationa l justice.

/pdf/justice-at-the-millennium-a-meta-analytic-review-of-25-years-b9qfmr75n2.pdf

Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research

1. Introduction.- 2. Early Research in Procedural Justice.- 3. Research Methods in Procedural Justice Research.- 4. Procedural Justice in Law I: Legal Attitudes and Behavior.- 5. Procedural Justice in Law II: Sources and Implications of Procedural Justice Judgments.- 6. The Generality of Procedural Justice.- 7. Procedural Justice in the Political Arena.- 8. Procedural Justice in Organizations.- 9. Conclusions and Hypotheses.- 10. Two Models of Procedural Justice.- References.- Author Index.

The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice

Publisher Summary This chapter focuses on one particular aspect of authoritativeness: voluntary compliance with the decisions of authorities. Social psychologists have long distinguished between obedience that is the result of coercion, and obedience that is the result of internal attitudes. Opinions describe “reward power” and “coercive power”, in which obedience is contingent on positive and negative outcomes, and distinguish both of these types of power from legitimate power, in which obedience flows from judgments about the legitimacy of the authority. Legitimate power depends on people taking the obligation on themselves to obey and voluntarily follow the decisions made by authorities. The chapter also focuses on legitimacy because it is important to recognize, that legitimacy is not the only attitudinal factor influencing effectiveness. It is also influenced by other cognitions about the authority, most notably judgments of his or her expertise with respect to the problem at hand. The willingness of group members to accept a leader's directives is only helpful when the leader knows what directives to issue.

A Relational Model of Authority in Groups

Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations.

One hundred seventy-nine undergraduate Ss took part in a study of the effects of instrumental and noninstrumental participation on distributive and procedural fairness judgments. In a goal-setting procedure, Ss were allowed voice before the goal was set, after the goal was set, or not at all. Ss received information relevant to the task, irrelevant information, or no information. Both preand postdecision voice led to higher fairness judgments than no voice, with predecision voice leading to higher fairness judgments than postdecision voice. Relevant information also increased perceived fairness. Mediation analyses showed that perceptions of control account for some, but not all, of the voice-based enhancement of procedural justice. The results show that both instrumental and noninstrumental concerns are involved in voice effects.

/pdf/voice-control-and-procedural-justice-instrumental-and-5e9ckrw7sx.pdf

E. Allan Lind

Papers

The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice

A Relational Model of Authority in Groups

Fairness heuristic theory: Justice judgments as pivotal cognitions in organizational relations.

Voice, control, and procedural justice : instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments

When fairness works : Toward a general theory of uncertainty management