Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Interactional justice, a subcomponent of organizational justice, has come to be seen as consisting of two specific types of interpersonal treatment (e.g. Greenberg, 1990a, 1993b). The first labeled interpersonal justice, reflects the degree to which people are treated with politeness, dignity, and respect by authorities or third parties ...
Distributive, procedural, and interactional justice perceptions are able to capture state specific levels of emotional exhaustion which fade over time; however, overall organizational justice perceptions give the most stable picture of the relationship between justice perceptions and emotional exhaustion over time.
Interactional justice [ edit ] In a podcast entitled "Under New Management", Joel Brockner, a professor of business at Columbia University, talks about the importance of the "interpersonal component of procedural fairness called 'interactional justice.'" [ 7 ] Interactional justice refers to "how the employee feels that the implementer did things."
[3] [25] [16] Schramm sees communication as a dynamic interaction in which two participants exchange messages. [1] [2] [16] That means that the process of communication does not end in the receiver's mind. Instead, upon receiving a message, the communicator returns some feedback: they formulate a new message in the form of an idea, encode it ...
Human communication can be defined as any Shared Symbolic Interaction. [6]Shared, because each communication process also requires a system of signification (the Code) as its necessary condition, and if the encoding is not known to all those who are involved in the communication process, there is no understanding and therefore fails the same notification.
[90] [94] However, it has been criticized because it simplifies some parts of the communicative process. For example, it presents communication as a one-way process and not as a dynamic interaction of messages going back and forth between both participants. [10] [23] [95]
A model of communication is a simplified presentation that aims to give a basic explanation of the process by highlighting its most fundamental characteristics and components. [ 16 ] [ 8 ] [ 17 ] For example, James Watson and Anne Hill see Lasswell's model as a mere questioning device and not as a full model of communication. [ 10 ]
Action undertaken by participants through a process of such argumentative communication can be assessed as to their rationality to the extent which they fulfill those criteria. Communicative rationality is distinct from instrumental, normative, and dramaturgical rationality by its ability to concern all three "worlds" as he terms them ...