Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38596324›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

The fairness of human resource management practices: an assessment by the justice sensitive.

Victor Y Haines, David Patient, Sylvie Guerrero

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Victor Y HainesSchool of Industrial Relations, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
David PatientVlerick Business School, Ghent, East Flanders, Belgium.
Sylvie GuerreroÉcole des sciences de la gestion (ESG), Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM), Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Although fairness is a pervasive and ongoing concern in organizations, the fairness of human resource management practices is often overlooked. This study examines how individual differences in justice sensitivity influence the extent to which human resource management practices are perceived to convey principles of organizational justice. Methods: Analysis was performed on a matching sample of 283 university students from three academic units in two countries having responded at two time points. Justice sensitivity was measured with the 40-item inventory developed and validated by Schmitt et al. (2010). Respondents were instructed to indicate to what extent each of 61 human resource management practices generally conveys principles of organizational justice. Results: Justice sensitivity was positively associated with subsequent assessments of the justice contents of human resource management practices. The distinction between self-oriented and other-oriented justice sensitivities was helpful in determining perceptions of these human resource management practices and of a subset of pay-for-performance practices. Discussion: The findings inform current research about the meanings borne by human resource management practices, and also increase understanding of entity judgment formation as an important aspect of systemic justice.

Indexed as

equity principlefairnesshuman resource managementjustice sensitivitypay-for-performancesystemic justice

Identifiers

PMID38596324
PMCPMC11002264

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.