Disentangling the Relational Approach to Organizational Justice : Meta-Analytic and Field Tests of Distinct Roles of Social Exchange and Social Identity

Social exchange- and social identity-based mechanisms have been commonly juxtaposed as two pivotal proxies of the relational approach for studying organizational justice. Despite their distinct theoretical roots, less is known about whether and how these two proximal mechanisms complement one another in accounting for justice effects on key outcomes. Tracing back to their disparate fundamental premises—“reciprocity” underpinning social exchanges and “oneness” underpinning identity construction—we attempt to disentangle the relative mediating effects of these two mechanisms. Our empirical testing hinges on one meta-analytic study with 105 independent samples (N = 29,868), coupled with one preregistered experience-sampling study with 1,941 cross-day observations over 3 weeks from 147 subordinate–supervisor pairs. Overall, we find that exchange-based mechanisms account for more of the indirect effect of justice on task performance, whereas identity-based mechanisms (particularly interdependent identity) account for more of the indirect effect of justice on counterproductive work behavior. Regarding the indirect effect on organizational citizenship behavior, identity-based mechanisms (particularly positive self-evaluations) and exchange-based mechanisms respectively present great utility between the two studies. By providing nuanced insight into the complementary yet distinct nature of these two prominent mechanisms, our research encourages a more granular theoretical approach for studying organizational justice effects.