Organizational justice has been the source of a great deal of recent research attention and has consequently been linked to a number of organizationally-relevant constructs, including organizational citizenship behaviors (Moorman, 1991), employee theft (Greenberg, 1990a), organizational commitment (Tyler, 1991), turnover (Dailey & Kirk, 1992) and job performance (Gilliland, 1994). However, researchers' ability to integrate findings from these diverse contexts is currently limited by the absence of a standardized operationalization of the justice construct. To compound this problem, little research has investigated the psychometric properties of existing organizational justice measures. For example, no research has empirically examined the dimensionality or the suggested context-sensitivity of this construct (cf., Cropanzano & Greenberg, 1997). Therefore, the purposes of the current study were to evaluate the psychometric properties of justice and to attempt to develop a global measure that could be applied across contexts. Study 1 involved three phases (1) screening a set of organizational justice items, (2) investigating the dimensionality of organizational justice and (3) examining justice for evidence of measurement stability. The set of items used in the current study was primarily collected from published research by Hauenstein, McGonigle and Flinder (1997). A set of 48 items with acceptable psychometric characteristics was identified. Phase 2 investigated the dimensionality of these items. Results indicated that none of the four a priori models of organizational justice dimensionality could adequately account for the dimensionality of these items. However, three alternative models were discovered. The first model includes the four dimensions suggested by Greenberg (1993b) in addition to a general organizational justice factor while the second model includes only justice and injustice factors in addition to the original organizational justice factor. Finally, the results of an exploratory factor analysis suggested three factors: Systemic Justice; Distributive Injustice; and Distributive Justice. Phase 3 then investigated the stability of this solution across subgroups while Study 2 compared exploratory factor structures across two work contexts. Results demonstrated some differences at both item- and construct-level in organizational justice across levels of job satisfaction and work experience. Further, some factorial instability across work contexts (e.g., selection, performance appraisal) was also observed. As a result, it was concluded that developing a global measure of organizational justice is difficult given the demonstrated context-sensitivity of the construct. Instead, a series of guidelines for developing future measures of organizational justice is proposed. / Ph. D.

Does the specialization and division of labor lead to the unequal distribution of social resources or the power in the highest stratification decide opportunities and incomes? What roles do occupation, incomes, and social status play in this society? The phenomenon of social stratification extending from specialization of labor results in the disputes over equality and inequality. People of different social stratification hold dissimilar social resources, which differentiate the opportunities that they acquire. In order to understand how people perceive the factors of inputs and outputs of social stratification, the experiment of information integration is to understand that the model of information Integration of how different groups and individuals influence the factors of inputs and outputs of social stratification, to investigate the perception of the factors of inputs and outputs of social stratification of different groups, and to increase the related analysis of social stratification in our country. This research takes Information Integration Theory (IIT) as research method to understand the internal process of how people deal with a couple of variables with perception. Integration of function would be the main discourse of Information Integration Theory. Through study, it is found that people usually use simple rules of algebra such as adding, multiplying and averaging to integrate information. The research is designed to induce the factors of inputs of social stratification as education and family background by means of documents; the factors of outcomes of social stratification as reputation of occupation and incomes. Information Integration Theory, IIT is employed to know the subjects¡¦ cognitive algebras and there might be different models of integration for people perceive unfairness very differently. The research result is shown as below:¡G 1 Information integration of the administrative group is the differential-weight averaging model in the category of ¡§education-reputation of occupation¡¨ whereas the working group is the adding model. 2 The information integration of the administrative group and the working group are both the differential-weight averaging model in the category of ¡§education-income¡¨. 3 The information integration of the administrative group and the working group are both the model of addition in the category of ¡§family background-reputation of occupation¡¨. 4 The information integration of the administrative group and the working group are both the differential-weight averaging model in the category of ¡§family background-income¡¨.

Public policies in a pluralistic society should be able to clarify and cope with the complicated nature of public issues dominated by ¡§multiple parties, multiple values, and subjective judgment.¡¨ (Farkas & Anderson, 1974) Therefore, instead of merely concluding with the outcome, we should also take input into account when evaluating resource allocation or assessing policy effectiveness. In addition, since the public and the government differ in their judgment criteria and indicators, and multiple parties also have different understandings, the controversy of ¡§inequity¡¨ thus arises. In short, to conduct fairness measurement, we should focus on defining the parties as well as the input and outcome indicators. This research adopted the Public Affairs Management framework to analyze Cijin Seaside Park in Kaohsiung City and Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf in New Taipei City. We have conducted a fairness measurement and cross-domain analysis to explore the equity perception in three aspects: economic equity, social fairness, and procedure justice. Moreover, we conducted a secondary data analysis, analyzed expert interviews, and generalized the carrier condition and factual judgment of the PAM framework. Furthermore, we explored the value judgment and interpersonal judgment in PAM framework with fairness measurement of the information integration theory. Our theory is based on the equity rule proposed by Anderson, which also emphasizes the individual and interpersonal comparison of individual input and outcome. Our results are demonstrated as follows: 1. In the individual value analysis of economic equity, both Cijin Seaside Park and Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf have over 10 local stores and tourists that fits one-factor rule of the tourist number factor. 2. In the individual value analysis of social fairness, Cijin Seaside Park has 10 local stores that support one-factor rule of the public support factor. However, Cijin Seaside Park has over eight tourists that fit the adding rule of public support factor and actual request factor, whereas Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf has over eight local stores and tourists that fit the same rule. 3. In individual value analysis of procedure justice, both Cijin Seaside Park and Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf have over 14 local stores and tourists that fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of policy support factor and administrative cooperation factor. 4. In interpersonal comparison of economic equity, the experimental result shows that the local stores and tourists in both Cijin Seaside Park and Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of the integration of their tourist number factors. Also, the local stores and tourists in both Cijin Seaside Park and Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of the integration of their revenue (consumption) factors. Moreover, the local stores and tourists in both Cijin Seaside Park and Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf both fit the adding rule of their respective tourist number factor and revenue (consumption) factor. This result also supports the ¡§rule of inequity integration.¡¨ 5. In interpersonal comparison of social fairness, the local stores in both Cijin Seaside Park and Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of the public support factor. They also fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of the actual request factor. As for the tourists, those in both two places fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of the public support factor. Also, they fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of the actual request factor. 6. In interpersonal comparison of procedure justice, the local stores in both Cijin Seaside Park and Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of policy support factor. They also fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of the administrative cooperation factor. As for the tourists, those in both Cijin Seaside Park and Tamshi Fishers¡¦ Wharf fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of policy support factor. Also, they fit the unequal-weight averaging rule of the administrative cooperation factor. We continued to conduct a cross-domain analysis to integrate the above research results, as well as the results of secondary data analysis and expert interviews. As a result, we thereby propose related suggestions and generalize the operation steps of fairness measurement.

It often appears some cognitive conflicts among the citizens¡¦ when evaluating the policy outcomes performance about Dengue fever prevention, since existed some characteristics in the input and outcome dimension, it include multi-involvers, multi-goals, multi-values and subjective judgement(Wang Ming-Shen and Chen Cheng-Liaou, 2004: 11). We taked the unfairness measurement approach of the Information Integration Theory (IIT) to explore the policy outcome performance about Dengue fever prevention. In this way, we constructed an algebraic model, namely ¡§Dengue Fever Basic Unfairness Measurement Model,¡¨ with accrute empirical test and validity criteria. According to the way of the factorial graph patterns and statistical interaction test of the model, we may analyze and collect these multiple information of policy outcomes(Farkas, 1991: 61 ; Anderson, 1996: 33). We obtained some important findings, include: 1.The citizen integrated the information of Dengue fever prevention outcomes by ¡¥averging¡¦ model, the experimental data support the mode and it had important policy implications. 2.The effort(implicit factor) of the governer¡¦s devoted to prevention tasks was more than the budget expendures(explicit factor) was the most important factor of outcome performance evaluation, and this had important cognitive implication. 3.According to the differences of the information qulity from the Dengue fever prevention, there was an interpersonal salience about the evaluation of the policy outcome performance. 4.It showed that highly corelation between the habitant¡¦s life modes and the prevention outcomes performance, this implied that the implicit social meaning of Dengue fever prevention were interpersonal interaction. 5.The citizen¡¦s perception of the unfairness measurement for the policy outcome performance of Dengue fever prevention were not satisfaction and sensitive to the interpersonal unfairness situation.