An attitudinal model of organizational commitment was tested using a sample of 367 managerial employees. Several aspects of the organization: perceived structure, process, and climate, as well as job satisfaction were found to be predictive of commitment. Job satisfaction and commitment were found to be equally predictive of voluntary turnover. Commitment was found to be predictive of individual motivation and objective job performance, but not of supervisors' ratings of job performance.

Data were collected on 365 managers representing five managerial levels in order to provide an initial field test of an equity model based on Adams (1963) and Lawler (197 1). Exploratory path analysis was performed using LISREL VI to identify the primary paths affecting equity perceptions and those leading to the outcomes of job performance and voluntary turnover. The primary variables influencing pay equity were salary level, job level, pay valence, and prior job performance. The data suggested that pay equity perceptions have an impact on voluntary turnover but not necessarily on job performance. The impact on turnover, however, was indirect, through its influence on pay satisfaction, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and intent to leave. The major predictors of job performance were prior job performance and salary level.Adams ' (1963, 1965) equity theory has been described as one of the more valid frameworks available for understanding human motivation (Miner, 1984). The theory has been applied to four broad areas of human interaction: exploiter-victim relationships, philanthropist-recipient relationships, business relationships, and intimate relationships (Walster, Walster & Berscheid, 1978). Within the business relationships category, attention has focused on exchanges between employers and their employees, and on the comparisons employees make against referents in assessing whether their outcomes from work (e.g. pay) are fair. Yet, while laboratory tests of the theory's major hypotheses have generally been supportive (Mowday, 1979), there has been relatively little field research. Moreover, with few exceptions, the field research has neglected the potential effect of pay equity perceptions on job performance(seeLord &Hohenfeld, 1979and Oldham, 1986 for exceptions) and voluntary turnover (see Dittrich & Carrell, 1979; Oldham, 1986 and Telly, French & Scott, 197 1 for exceptions). The neglect of job performance is surprising in light of Adams' (1963) original formulation, which predicted changes in work quantity and quality under certain inequitable circumstances, and in light of the numerous early laboratory studies which found that perceived inequity, both over-reward and underreward, can affect job performance (see Mowday, 1979, for a review). As to voluntary turnover, Adams (1963) referred to 'leaving the field' as a possible last resort to perceptions of severe inequity, and in a laboratory study, Schmitt & Marwell (1972) found that a significant proportion of subjects chose to forgo rewards and withdraw from * Requests for reprints. 146Timothy P . Summers and William H . Hendrix inequitable situations where withdrawal was the only alternative to an inequitable situation. This paucity of research is especially surprising given the obvious importance to organizations of job performance and voluntary turnover.In terms of attitudinal outcomes of perceived inequity, most field research has focused on pay satisfaction (cf. Berkowitz, Fraser, Treasure & Cochran, 1987;Ronen, 1986;Scholl, Cooper, & Mc...

The paper provides a reexamination of Goodman's (1974) study of the referents used in evaluating pay. The present field research, largely in corroboration of Goodman (1974), found that perceptions of pay equity with respect to three classes of referents are strongly associated with pay satisfaction. In addition, pay valence was found to be associated with perceptions of equity vis-a-vis referent classes. This research was generally not supportive of Goodman's identification of factors affecting the selection of referents. Implications for future research are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to distinguish the effects of distributive, instrumental procedural, and noninstrumental (i.e. group‐value effects) procedural justice in a field study. As predicted by the group‐value model (Lind & Tyler, 1988), noninstrumental procedural justice captured unique variance in organizational commitment, turnover intentions, as well as both individual and group performance. Furthermore, noninstrumental justice explained more unique variance in commitment and performance than did distributive justice or instrumental procedural justice. These findings provide a greater understanding of why procedural justice, as a whole, has been found to be more predictive of these outcomes in prior research.

This field study used structural equation modeling to investigate the relationships among: (1) distributive and procedural justice; (2) justice components and organizational commitment; and (3) justice components and behaviors/behavioral intentions. The results suggest that, over time, procedural justice judgments are likely to influence perceptions of distributive justice, but not vice versa. In addition, the results suggest that both distributive justice and procedural justice have reciprocal relationships with commitment and turnover intentions, although in some cases they are contingent on lagged effects. Relationships between procedural justice and behaviors (i.e. compliance, performance) were unidirectional, significant only in the justice-to-behavior direction.