Factors impacting resource allocation decisions: the interaction of cognitive load and value preferences with knowledge of distributive injustice

Abstract

This study attempts to validate and expand the deontological model of organizational justice. The deontological model states that individuals experience a sense of moral outrage when they witness others being treated unfairly. This feeling of deonance leads them to react out against the perpetrator. The research in this area has shown that in resource allocation situations, individuals will sacrifice their own resources in order to punish a teammate’s past unfair behavior, the current study tested whether or not deontological effects would occur when individuals were under high levels of cognitive load. Results indicated that no significant interaction existed between fairness information and cognitive load in predicting the choice of a selfish or sacrificial allocation relative to an equal allocation. Secondly, the current study explored the role of individual differences in value priorities in impacting deontological effects. Results indicated that individual differences in Hedonism, Self-Direction, Universalism, and Security interacted with fairness information in predicting an equal allocation choice over a sacrificial allocation choice, but not in predicting an equal over a selfish allocation choice. Specifically, when participants did not have any information about their teammates, they made more equal allocations (as opposed to sacrificial allocations) when they valued hedonism and self-direction. However, when participants had the knowledge that a teammate had acted unfairly, hedonism and self-direction did not predict choice. Conversely, when participants knew a teammate had acted unfairly, they made more sacrificial allocations (as opposed to equal allocations) when they valued universalism and security. When they had no information about their partners, universalism and security did not predict choice. An unexpected yet noteworthy finding was that although a large majority of the participants chose to divide the resource pool evenly, verbalized cognitions data suggested that this choice was largely driven by a concern for fairness. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.