An unsettled bargain? Mothers' perceptions of justice and fairness in paid work.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Yerkes MA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5476186 | biostudies-other | 2017 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:A distinctive feature across human societies is our interest in justice and fairness. People will sometimes invest in extremely costly behavior to achieve fair outcomes for themselves and others. Why do people care so much about justice? One way to address this is comparatively, exploring behaviors related to justice and fairness in other species. In this paper, I review work exploring responses to inequity, prosocial behavior, and other relevant behaviors in nonhuman primates in an effort to understand both the potential evolutionary function of these behaviors and the social and ecological reasons for the individual differences in behavior. I also consider how these behaviors relate to human behavior, particularly in the case of experimental studies using games derived from experimental economics to compare nonhuman primates' responses to those of humans in similar experimental conditions. These results emphasize the importance of a comparative approach to better understand the function and diversity of human behavior.
| S-EPMC3690609 | biostudies-other
Project description:Artificial Intelligence and algorithms are increasingly able to replace human workers in cognitively sophisticated tasks, including ones related to justice. Many governments and international organizations are discussing policies related to the application of algorithmic judges in courts. In this paper, we investigate the public perceptions of algorithmic judges. Across two experiments (N = 1,822), and an internal meta-analysis (N = 3,039), our results show that even though court users acknowledge several advantages of algorithms (i.e., cost and speed), they trust human judges more and have greater intentions to go to the court when a human (vs. an algorithmic) judge adjudicates. Additionally, we demonstrate that the extent that individuals trust algorithmic and human judges depends on the nature of the case: trust for algorithmic judges is especially low when legal cases involve emotional complexities (vs. technically complex or uncomplicated cases).Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10506-022-09312-z.
| S-EPMC10102053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are currently no tools for assessing claimants' perceived fairness in work disability evaluations. In our study, we describe the development and validation of a questionnaire for this purpose.MethodIn cooperation with subject-matter experts of Swiss insurance medicine, we developed the 30-item Basel Fairness Questionnaire (BFQ). Claimants anonymously answered the questionnaire immediately after their disability evaluation, still unaware about its outcome. For each item, there were four response options, ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". The construct validity of the BFQ was assessed by running a principal component analysis (PCA).ResultsIn 4% of the questionnaires, the claimants' perception on the disability evaluation was negative (below the median of the scale). The PCA of the items responses followed by an orthogonal rotation revealed four factors, namely (1) Interviewing Skills, (2) Rapport, (3) Transparency, and (4) Case Familiarity, explaining 63.5% of the total variance.DiscussionThe ratings presumably have some positive bias by sample selection and response bias. The PCA factors corresponded to dimensions that subject-matter experts had beforehand identified as relevant. However, all item ratings were highly intercorrelated, which suggests that the presumed underlying dimensions are not independent.ConclusionThe BFQ represents the first self-administered instrument for measuring claimants' perceived fairness of work disability evaluations, allowing the assessment of informational, procedural, and interactive justice from the perspective of claimants. In cooperation with Swiss assessment centres, we plan to implement a refined version of the BFQ as feedback instrument in work disability evaluations.
| S-EPMC7498050 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite a growing body of research on the relationship between justice and perceptions of an authority's legitimacy, few studies have addressed the effects of changes in justice on perceived legitimacy. In the present study, we tested a dynamic model emphasizing the interactive influences of both interpersonal justice trajectories and current experience predicting perceived legitimacy. We tested the trajectory of interpersonal justice over time as a predictor of perceived legitimacy (Study 1) and the current experience of justice as a moderator of this link (Study 2). In Study 1 participants were randomly assigned to receive either improving or declining feedback from an anonymous tutor over the course of four days. Results showed that participants with an improving trajectory perceived the authority to have higher legitimacy. In Study 2 participants rated the tutor's fairness on 3 consecutive weeks, which were used to identify naturally interpersonal trajectories; we then manipulated the current interpersonal justice experience in the fourth week. Results showed that the trajectory effect was significant when the current experience was just, but not when it was unjust.
| S-EPMC7644780 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the increase in gender
| S-EPMC9433736 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledBackground. Little research exists on the impact of paid work on academic performance of students of health sciences. No research exists on this subject for students in Colombia. Objectives. This paper seeks to analyze the impact of paid work on academic performance among nursing students.Design, settings and participantscross-sectional research, involving 430 of nursing students from the National University of Colombia (N = 566). Methods. Variables analyzed: sex, age, work activity, attendance, current semester, degree subjects studied and unavailable, lost credits, grades during the second semester of 2013, and delayed semesters. Subgroups analyzed: (i) according to labor activity: do not work, work up to 20 h and work more than 20 h per week; (ii) Grade point average: failing is considered as less than 3.0 and passing 3.0 or above out of 5.0. Percentage of delayed semesters were calculated. Qualitative and quantitative variables were analyzed for groups by work activity. The percentage and probability of students getting a grade point average less than 3.0 and delaying semesters were calculated by multivariate logistic regression. Results. A total of 219 of the students work (50.9%), the main reason is socioeconomic, of which 99 (45.2%) work more than 20 h per week and have an increased risk of failing, which is higher in the first semester. They also get lower grades, lose more credits and take longer to finish the degree. The logistic bivariate regressions of success (grade point average, credits gained, courses gained and not having delayed semesters) reduce with work, above all in those who work more than 20 h per week and increase as the number of semesters completed increases, independent of sex. Conclusion. A high percentage of nursing students work more than 20 h per week. The compatibility of paid work with studies in university nursing students has a negative impact on academic performance, more so when they work more than 20 h per week. This negative impact diminishes as the student completes semesters, irrespective of the sex of the students.
| S-EPMC4824892 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although inequality in the US has increased since the 1960s, several studies show that Americans underestimate it. Reasons include overreliance on one's local perspective and ideologically-motivated cognition. We propose a novel mechanism to account for the misperceptions of income inequality. We hypothesize that compared to those who feel less autonomy, the people who believe they are autonomous and have control over their lives also believe that (1) income inequality is lower and (2) income inequality is more acceptable. Using a representative sample of 3,427 Americans, we find evidence to support these hypotheses.
| S-EPMC7806156 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceMost studies use impaired functioning alone to specify populations with disabilities. However, some people with functional impairments do not identify as disabled. With functional status-based definitions, studies have shown disparate care quality for people with disabilities.ObjectiveTo examine whether impairment and disability identity have different associations with perceived health care experiences and explore factors associated with disability identification.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used a nationally representative survey of US adults conducted from April 20 through May 31, 2021, and analyzed between June 1 and August 31, 2022. Survey participants were 1822 English- or Spanish-speaking adults responding either online or via telephone.ExposuresUsing 8 survey questions, participants were grouped according to presence of impairment and disability identity.Main outcomes and measuresLikert scale measures of trust, respect, and fairness (henceforth, procedural justice measures) were dichotomized. Sociodemographic characteristics and rates of procedural justice responses were compared across groups. Multivariable logistic regressions adjusting for baseline characteristics were performed to (1) estimate associations of impairment and disability identity with perceptions of procedural justice and (2) explore factors associated with disability identification. Analyses applied survey weights.ResultsOf 6126 individuals invited to participate, 1854 (30.3%) completed the survey. Thirty-two were excluded due to unreportable gender, for a final analytic sample of 1822 participants. Participants with impairments (n = 816; mean [SD] age, 48.1 [17.0] years; 51.2% women, 48.8% men) had worse perceptions on 7 of 10 procedural justice measures (crude) compared with those without impairments (n = 1006; mean [SD] age, 49.6 [18.1] years, 55.1% female, 44.9% male). Among respondents with impairments, those who did (n = 340) vs did not (n = 476) identify as disabled gave better ratings for clinician communication efforts (a lot of effort, 38.8% vs 31.0%) and having health goals understood (understood very or fairly well, 77.2% vs 70.1%) but gave worse ratings for respect (almost never felt inferior or talked down to, 66.1% vs 59.1%). Disability identification was associated with more reports of unfair treatment (31.0% vs 22.4%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.12-2.42) and of being unafraid to ask questions or disagree (50.5% vs 40.1%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.04-20.19). Income and employment were associated with disability identification.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional survey study of US adults, health care perceptions differed between groups defined by impairment status and disability identity. These findings suggest that, alongside functional measures, health systems should capture disability identity to better address disparities for people with impairments.
| S-EPMC10517379 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Power imbalance often leads to unequal allocations. However, it remains largely unknown how different forms of power and meritocratic considerations interact to shape fairness perceptions. Using modified Ultimatum Games, we examined how two power forms-decision power and availability of attractive outside option-affect bargaining behavior and fairness perceptions, and how meritocratic considerations are incorporated into the fairness perceptions of powerful and powerless individuals. We identified an asymmetric power effect: having increased decision power or attractive outside options independently increased self-advantageous allocations and self-serving fairness perceptions, whereas the combined lack of both power forms led to self-disadvantageous allocations but had no influence on fairness perceptions. The power effect on fairness perceptions became symmetric when power was obtained through a meritocratic process (procedural justice). In contrast, relative contributions to resource production (distributive justice) did not moderate power effects. We provide causal evidence that the powerful, but not the powerless, strive to minimize cognitive dissonance between behavior and fairness perceptions by interpreting fairness in self-serving ways. This study contributes novel insights into the interplay between different power forms, the asymmetry of power effects, the moderating role of procedural justice, and the mediating role of behavior in the power-driven adjustment of fairness perceptions.
| S-EPMC9259606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is considerable evidence that the experience of justice is associated with perceived legitimacy of authority, but there has been no research about this association when considering past rather than current fairness. Based on the fairness heuristic theory, we tested the hypothesis that interpersonal justice trajectories positively affect perceived legitimacy of the authority; we also tested whether social class moderated this effect. Community residents (N = 111; 54 women) rated the authority's fairness on 16 consecutive weeks and rated perceived legitimacy on the 16th week. The results of latent growth modeling showed that the trajectory of interpersonal justice scores leading up to the final week significantly predicted perceived legitimacy, regardless of the current experience of interpersonal fairness. Tests of moderation showed that the legitimacy perceptions of individuals of lower subjective social class were significantly affected by interpersonal justice trajectories, whereas this was not the case among individuals of higher subjective social class. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for research on perceived legitimacy and justice, as well as their implications for understanding social class.
| S-EPMC7907497 | biostudies-literature