The literature on organizational justice has identified 3 key components of this process: distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. On the basis of fairness heuristic theory, we reasoned that employees may use perceptions of these 3 components as a basis for drawing inferences about the fairness of the organization as a whole (i.e., their perceptions of systemic justice). A field study was conducted on a sample of 232 employees working in various organizations. Results show that employees' perceptions of procedural justice and interactional justice in their organizations positively predicted perceptions of systemic justice (i.e., that the organization was fair overall). Perceptions of distributive justice, however, did not predict perceptions of systemic justice. Practical implications of these findings are discussed.

No abstract

This paper describes the development and validation of a deontic justice scale (DJS). Study 1 (n = 124) was conducted to test the initial 36‐item version of the scale. It resulted in the reduction of the initial scale to 18 items, including 3 dimensions: moral obligation (8 items), moral accountability (6 items), and moral outrage (4 items). Study 2 (n = 101) was conducted to examine the construct validity and confirm the factor structure of the DJS. Findings from both studies showed evidence of the scale's construct validity. They also showed that deontic justice is a multidimensional construct encompassing moral obligation, moral accountability, and moral outrage. The scale's implications for use as an adequate research instrument are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract