Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

 

Search Results

Danielle, D., Shao, R., Skarlicki, D.P., Song, Y.H., Wang, M. and Van, J. (2016). "Extending the Multifoci Perspective: The Role of Supervisor Justice and Moral Identity in the Relationship between Customer Justice and Customer-directed Sabotage", Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(1), 108-121.

Open Access Download

Abstract The multifoci perspective of justice proposes that individuals tend to target their (in)justice reactions toward the perceived source of the mistreatment. Empirical support for target-specific reactions, however, has been mixed. To explore theoretically relevant reasons for these discrepant results and address unanswered questions in the multifoci justice literature, the present research examines how different justice sources might interactively predict target-specific reactions, and whether these effects occur as a function of moral identity. Results from a sample of North American frontline service employees (N = 314, Study 1) showed that among employees with lower levels of moral identity, low supervisor justice exacerbated the association between low customer justice and customer-directed sabotage, whereas this exacerbation effect was not observed among employees with higher levels of moral identity. This 3-way interaction effect was replicated in a sample of South Korean employees (N = 265, Study 2). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Jones, K.S., Rupp, D.E., Shao, R. and Skarlick, D. (2013). "Employee Justice Across Cultures: A Meta-analytic Review", Journal of Management, 39(1), 263-301.

Open Access Download

Abstract This article explores the moderating influence of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (individualism/collectivism, masculinity/femininity, uncertainty avoidance, and power distance) on the relationship between justice perceptions and both supervisor- and employer-related outcomes. The integration of justice theories with Hofstede’s national culture typology implies multiple, and potentially competing, propositions regarding the impact of culture on justice effects. To sort out these issues, the authors present meta-analytic findings summarizing data from 495 unique samples, representing over 190,000 employees working in 32 distinct countries and regions. Results indicate that justice effects are strongest among nations associated with individualism, femininity, uncertainty avoidance, and low power distance. The authors discuss these findings in terms of the practice of justice across cultures.

Jones, K., Liao, H. Rupp, D.E. and Shao, R.. "The Utility of a Multifoci Approach to the Study of Organizational Justice: A Meta-analytic Investigation into the Consideration of Normative Rules, Moral Accountability, Bandwidth-fidelity, and Social Exchange", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 123(2), 159-185.

View Paper

Abstract Multifoci justice pulls from research on social exchange theory to argue that despite the proliferation of rule sets in the literature (often referred to as the “types” of justice), individuals seek to hold some party accountable for the violation/upholding of such rules, and it is these parties (e.g., supervisors, the organization as a whole) that are most likely to be the recipients of attitudes and behaviors (i.e., target similarity effects). To explore these issues, we meta-analytically (k = 647, N = 235,682) compared the predictive validities of source- vs. type-based justice perceptions and found that (a) multifoci justice perceptions more strongly predicted outcomes directed at matched sources than did type-based justice perceptions, (b) multifoci justice perceptions more strongly predicted target similar than dissimilar outcomes, and (c) the relationships between multifoci justice perceptions and target similar outcomes were mediated by source-specific social exchange.