Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Reconsidering the Role of Procedures for Decision Acceptance
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
Number of Authors: 42019 (English)In: British Journal of Political Science, ISSN 0007-1234, E-ISSN 1469-2112, Vol. 49, no 1, p. 291-314Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Procedural fairness theory posits that the way in which authoritative decisions are made strongly impacts people's willingness to accept them. This article challenges this claim by contending that democratic governments can achieve little in terms of acceptance of policy decisions by the procedural means at their disposal. Instead, outcome favorability is the dominant determinant of decision acceptance. The article explicates that while central parts of procedural fairness theory are true, outcome favorability is still overwhelmingly the strongest determinant of individuals' willingness to accept authoritative decisions. It improves on previous research by locating all key variables into one causal model and testing this model using appropriate data. Findings from a large number of experiments (both vignette and field) reproduce the expected relationships from previous research and support the additional predictions.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. Vol. 49, no 1, p. 291-314
Keywords [en]
procedural fairness, decision acceptance, decision-making procedures
National Category
Political Science Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-166606DOI: 10.1017/S0007123416000508ISI: 000458665100014OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-166606DiVA, id: diva2:1300684
Available from: 2019-03-29 Created: 2019-03-29 Last updated: 2019-03-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindholm, Torun
By organisation
Department of Psychology
In the same journal
British Journal of Political Science
Political SciencePsychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 17 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf