Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repository.iimb.ac.in/handle/2074/13469
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSingh, Ramadhar-
dc.contributor.authorBhullar, Naureen-
dc.contributor.authorSankaran, Krithiga-
dc.contributor.authorLim, Hui Koon-
dc.date.accessioned2020-07-20T14:35:53Z-
dc.date.available2020-07-20T14:35:53Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.issn0970-3896-
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.iimb.ac.in/handle/2074/13469-
dc.description.abstractContrary to the fairness expected in the modern world, people seem to treat in-group members (us) better than out-group members (them). Do people then defend in-group members as politicians but prosecute out-group members in a fair-but-biased manner? Given information about injustices by a male or female manager, participants made outrage, attribution, attitude, and punishment responses to the manager. In-group defence held in the first three responses but fairness in punishment. However, the seeming fairness in punishment arose from bias suppression by outrage and mediation by attitude, and the order of mediation was from outrage to attitude and not vice versa.-
dc.publisherIndian Institute of Management Bangalore-
dc.publisherElsevier, Science Direct-
dc.subjectFairness-
dc.subjectIn-group defence-
dc.subjectOut-group-
dc.subjectProsecution-
dc.subjectSuppression-
dc.subjectSequential-
dc.subjectMediation-
dc.subjectPunishment-
dc.titlePunishing an “unfair” leader: People as pragmatic politicians with in-group but fair-but-biased prosecutors with out-group-
dc.typeJournal Article-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.iimb.2018.01.002-
dc.pages77-90p.-
dc.vol.noVol.30-
dc.issue.noIss.1-
dc.journal.nameIIMB Management Review-
Appears in Collections:2010-2019
Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
Singh_IIMBMR_2018_Vol.30_Iss.1.pdf1.41 MBAdobe PDFView/Open    Request a copy
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.