Eurich, Tasha L., authorKraiger, Kurt, advisor2024-03-132024-03-132007https://hdl.handle.net/10217/237715This investigation applied uncertainty management theory (van den Bos & Lind, 2002) to generate a model predicting that situational and dispositional uncertainty would moderate justice-to-outcome relationships. First, the model hypothesized that members of virtual teams would experience increased situational uncertainty relative to members of co-located teams, and situational uncertainty was predicted to intensify reactions to fairness and unfairness. Specifically, it was hypothesized that uncertainty would strengthen (a) the positive relationship between procedural justice and both performance and supervisory trust and (b) the negative relationship between procedural justice and both emotions and counterproductive behavior. Second, because individuals high in risk aversion and uncertainty intolerance experience increased dispositional uncertainty, the model predicted that those high on both traits would exhibit more polarized reactions to fair and unfair procedures than those low on both traits. Specifically, when perceptions of unfairness were present, relative to individuals low on both traits, those high on both traits were proposed to demonstrate increased negative emotions and counterproductive behavior, while demonstrating increased performance and supervisory trust under fair conditions. Third, relative contributions to the outcomes of procedural justice and both situational and dispositional uncertainty interaction terms were tested. Results revealed that (a) as predicted, media richness was lowest in virtual teams relative to co-located ones, (b) counter to predictions, social presence was higher, and team uncertainty was lower, in virtual teams relative to co-located ones, (c) interactive effects of procedural justice and dispositional uncertainty were present for both trust and state anger, and (d) interactive effects of procedural justice and situational uncertainty due to virtual teams did not emerge. Analyses for the relative contributions of each type of predictor indicated that main effects for procedural justice explained the majority of variance in outcomes, such as trust. Procedural justice by dispositional uncertainty interactions explained a small but important amount of variance in outcomes, and procedural justice by situational uncertainty interactions explained effectively no variance. Theoretical and practical contributions are discussed.born digitaldoctoral dissertationsengCopyright and other restrictions may apply. User is responsible for compliance with all applicable laws. For information about copyright law, please see https://libguides.colostate.edu/copyright.dispositional uncertaintyfairnessjustice-to-outcomeorganizational justicesituational uncertaintyuncertainty managementvirtual teamsmodelsteamstrustbehaviorstudiesresearchvideo teleconferencingcommunicationinjusticeresearcherscitizenshipinstant messagingheuristicemotionsperceptionshypothesesdecision makingcopyrightmedia richnessprocedural justiceTextPer the terms of a contractual agreement, all use of this item is limited to the non-commercial use of Colorado State University and its authorized users.