Abstract
PurposeDue to the dominant use of the singular view of the self-categorization process in the literature, this article seeks to develop a typology, from a dyadic categorization perspective, that describes different types of prejudice and justice in the organization based on one's self-categorization and others' categorization of one's self.Design/methodology/approachThe authors develop a typology by drawing upon social identity, self-categorization and self-consistency theories.FindingsThe authors propose the following findings. First, the more an individual self-categorizes as an in-group member regardless of how others categorize the individual, the more likely the individual experiences a particular form of justice. Second, the more an individual self-categorizes as an out-group member regardless of how others categorize the individual, the more likely the individual experiences a particular form of prejudice. Finally, based on the dyadic categorization approach, the authors propose four distinct types of prejudice and justice: communal prejudice, self-induced prejudice, fantasized justice and actualized justice.Originality/valueThe authors advance the literature by providing a dyadic categorization view that helps describe employees' experience of prejudice or justice in the organization. Additionally, this article offers some managerial recommendations that help managers actualize true justice in the organization.
Subject
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Public Administration,Applied Psychology
Reference91 articles.
1. Towards an understanding of inequity;Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,1963
2. Gender stereotypes in job advertisements: what do they imply for the gender salary gap?;Journal of Labor Research,2022
3. Ingroup favoritism in cooperation: a meta-analysis;Psychological Bulletin,2014
4. A sense of self-perceived collective victimhood in intractable conflicts;International Review of the Red Cross,2009
5. Working under cover: performance-related self-confidence among members of contextually devalued groups who try to pass;European Journal of Social Psychology,2006