Interventions for the prevention of perceived unfairness in assessment contexts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v20i1.505Keywords:
candidate reactions, perceived fairness, assessment, cognitive reframing, mood induction, instrumental interventionsAbstract
Based on a posttest-only control group design, we analyzed the efficiency of three group-level interventions (i.e., cognitive reframing, mood induction, and instrumental interventions) on the fairness perceptions of 198 participants in an assessment context. Each intervention was derived from a conceptual framework (Gilliland’s theory, Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy, Affect-as-Information Perspective), which was empirically validated. Although the results are not extremely encouraging, as between the three experimental groups and the control one (no intervention) there were not large statistical differences, our study still highlights that the assessors need to focus on the participants if they wish to increase their perceptions of fairness, not only over its formal elements. A series of limitations and future research directions are presented.
Downloads
References
Allen, M. (2017). The Sage Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods (Vols. 1-4). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc doi: 10.4135/9781483381411
Anderson, N. (2011). Perceived Job Discrimination: Toward a model of applicant propensity to case initiation in selection: Perceived Job Discrimination. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19, 229-244.
Ashton-James, C., Ashkanasy, N.M. (2005), What Lies Beneath? A Process Analysis of Affective Events Theory, In Ashkanasy, N.M, Zerbe, W.J., Härtel, C. E.J. (ed.) The Effect of Affect in Organizational Settings. Research on Emotion in Organizations. (pp.23 – 46). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Barclay, L. J., & Kiefer, T. (2014). Approach or avoid? Exploring overall justice and the differential effects of positive and negative emotions. Journal of Management, 40, 1857-1898.
Barsky, A., Kaplan, S.A., & Beal, D.J. (2011). Just feelings? The role of affect in the formation of organizational fairness judgments. Journal of Management, 37, 248-279.
Birenbaum, M., DeLuca, C., Earl, L., Heritage, M., Klenowski, V., Looney, A., et al. (2015). International trends in the implementation of assessment: Implications for policy and practice. Policy Futures in Education, 15, 59-68.
Byrne, Z.S. (2005). Fairness Reduce the Negative Effects of Organizational Politics on Turnover Intentions, Citizenship Behavior and Job Performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 175-200.
Butucescu, A., Iliescu, D., & Opariuc, C.‐D. (2019) The Generalizability of Reactions to Assessment: An Application of the Selection Procedural Justice Scale (SPS) in Academic Settings. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 27, 406-410.
Butucescu, A., & Iliescu, D. (2020). Fairness perceptions in educational assessment: the role of positive and negative affect. Educational Studies, DOI:10.1080/03055698.2020.1753176.
Chory-Assad, R. M. (2002). Classroom justice: Perceptions of fairness as a predictor of student motivation, learning, and aggression. Communication Quarterly, 50, 58-77.
hory-Assad, R. M., & Paulsel, M. L. (2004b). Classroom justice: Student aggression and resistance
as reactions to perceived unfairness. Communication Education ,53, 253
/273
hory-Assad, R. M., & Paulsel, M. L. (2004b). Classroom justice: Student aggression and resistance
as reactions to perceived unfairness. Communication Education ,53, 253
/273
hory-Assad, R. M., & Paulsel, M. L. (2004b). Classroom justice: Student aggression and resistance
as reactions to perceived unfairness. Communication Education ,53, 253
/273
Chory-Assad, R. M., & Paulsel, M. L. (2004b). Classroom justice: Student aggression and resistance as reactions to perceived unfairness. Communication Education, 53, 253-273.
Chory, R. M., Horan, S. M., & Houser, M. L. (2017). Justice in the higher education classroom: Students’ perceptions of unfairness and responses to instructors. Innovative Higher Education, 42, 321–336.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425– 445.
Colquitt, J. A., & Rodell, J. B. (2015). Measuring justice and fairness. In R. Cropanzano & M. Ambrose (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Justice in Work Organizations (pp. 187- 202). Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.
D'Arcy, L., Geoghegan, E., Gibson, R., Hines, A., & MacAnaney, O. (2016) An exploration of fairness in the assessment and process of student group work. Dublin Institute of Technology. Retrieved from https://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article =1008&context =ltcpgdprp.
Ellis, A. (1950). An introduction to the principles of scientific psychoanalysis. Genetic Psychology Monographs.
Ellis, A. (2003). Cognitive restructuring of the disputing of irrational beliefs. Cognitive behavior therapy: Applying empirically supported techniques in your practice, 79-83.
Gilliland, S. W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems: an organizational justice perspective. Acad. Manage. Rev. 18, 694–734.
Goodrum, D., Hackling, M., & Rennie, L. (2001). The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools. Canberra, ACT: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
Guilbault, M. (2016) Students as customers in higher education: reframing the debate, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 26, 132-142.
Hausknecht, J. P., Day, D. V., & Thomas, S. C. (2004). Candidate reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 5, 639-683.
Macan, T. H., Avedon, M. J., Paese, M., & Smith, D. E. (1994). The effects of applicants’ reactions to cognitive ability tests and an assessment center. Personnel Psychology, 47, 715–738.
McCarthy, J. M., Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Anderson, N. R., Costa, A. C., & Ahmed, S. M. (2017). Applicant perspectives during selection: A review addressing “So what?,” “What’s new?,” and “Where to next?”. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1693-1725.
Nikolaou, I., Bauer, T. N., & Truxillo, D. M. (2015). Applicant reactions to selection methods: An overview of recent research and suggestions for the future. In I. Nikolaou & J. K. Oostrom (Eds.), Employee Recruitment, Selection, and Assessment. Contemporary Issues for Theory and Practice (pp. 80-96). Hove, UK: Routledge.
Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Botella, J. (2017). Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated learning and self-efficacy: Four meta-analyses. Educational Research Review, 22, 74-98.
Paulsel, M. L., Chory-Assad, R. M., & Dunleavy, K. N. (2005). Student perceptions of instructor power as a predictor of classroom justice. Communication Research Reports,22, 207-215.
Rumschlag, K. E. (2017). Teacher burnout: A quantitative analysis of emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment, and depersonalization. International management review, 13, 22-36.
Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (2007). Feelings and phenomenal experiences. In A. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (eds.), Social Psychology. Handbook of Basic Principles (2nd ed.; pp. 385-407). New York: Guilford.
Tetrick, L. E., & Winslow, C. J. (2015). Workplace stress management interventions and health promotion. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 583-603.
The jamovi project (2022). jamovi. (Version 2.3) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://www.jamovi.org.
Tolin, D. F. (2010). Is cognitive–behavioral therapy more effective than other therapies?: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(, 710–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.05.003
Truxillo, D. M., Bauer, T. N., Campion, M. A., & Paronto, M. E. (2006). A Field Study of the Role of Big Five Personality in Applicant Perceptions of Selection Fairness, Self, and the Hiring Organization. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 269–277.
Truxillo, D. M., & Bauer, T. N. (2011). Applicant reactions to organizations and selection systems. In: S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA Handbook of I/O Psychology, Volume II (pp. 379–397). Washington, DC: APA Press.
Tyler, T. R., Goff, P. A., & MacCoun, R. J. (2015). The impact of psychological science on policing in the United States: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and effective law enforcement. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16, 75–109.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Psihologia Resurselor Umane
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal,it also allows for use of the work for non-commercial purposes and if others remix, transform or build upon the works found in this journal they must distribute the contributions under the same licence as the original.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See: The Effect of Open Access).
