<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE Publisher PUBLIC "-//MetaPress//DTD MetaPress 2.0//EN" "http://public.metapress.com/dtd/MPRESS/MetaPressv2.dtd">
<Publisher>
	<PublisherInfo>
		<PublisherName>Baywood Publishing Company</PublisherName>
	</PublisherInfo>
	<Journal>
		<JournalInfo JournalType="Journals">
			<JournalPrintISSN>2167-7816</JournalPrintISSN>
			<JournalElectronicISSN>2167-7824</JournalElectronicISSN>
			<JournalTitle>Journal of Collective Negotiations (formerly Journal of Collective Negotiations in the Public Sector)</JournalTitle>
			<JournalCode>BWCN</JournalCode>
			<JournalID>300318</JournalID>
			<JournalURL>http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=journal&amp;id=300318</JournalURL>
		</JournalInfo>
		<Volume>
			<VolumeInfo>
				<VolumeNumber>31</VolumeNumber>
			</VolumeInfo>
			<Issue>
				<IssueInfo IssueType="Regular">
					<IssueNumberBegin>2</IssueNumberBegin>
					<IssueNumberEnd>2</IssueNumberEnd>
					<IssueSupplement>0</IssueSupplement>
					<IssuePartStart>0</IssuePartStart>
					<IssuePartEnd>0</IssuePartEnd>
					<IssueSequence>000031000220070101</IssueSequence>
					<IssuePublicationDate>
						<CoverDate Year="2007" Month="1" Day="1"/>
						<CoverDisplay>Number 2 / 2007</CoverDisplay>
					</IssuePublicationDate>
					<IssueID>069NF0896EK5</IssueID>
					<IssueURL>http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=issue&amp;id=069NF0896EK5</IssueURL>
				</IssueInfo>
				<Article ArticleType="Original">
					<ArticleInfo Free="No" ESM="No">
						<ArticleDOI>10.2190/CN.31.2.a</ArticleDOI>
						<ArticlePII>1153G7273W0M42N2</ArticlePII>
						<ArticleSequenceNumber>1</ArticleSequenceNumber>
						<ArticleTitle Language="En">Procedural Justice and Supervisors' Personal Power Bases: Effects on Employees' Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Sessions, Commitment, and Motivation</ArticleTitle>
						<ArticleFirstPage>101</ArticleFirstPage>
						<ArticleLastPage>118</ArticleLastPage>
						<ArticleHistory>
							<RegistrationDate>20080116</RegistrationDate>
							<ReceivedDate>20080116</ReceivedDate>
							<Accepted>20080116</Accepted>
							<OnlineDate>20080116</OnlineDate>
						</ArticleHistory>
						<FullTextFileName>1153G7273W0M42N2.pdf</FullTextFileName>
						<FullTextURL>http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&amp;id=1153G7273W0M42N2</FullTextURL>
						<Composite>2</Composite>
					</ArticleInfo>
					<ArticleHeader>
						<AuthorGroup>
							<Author AffiliationID="A1">
								<GivenName>Herman</GivenName>
								<Initials/>
								<FamilyName>Steensma</FamilyName>
								<Degrees/>
								<Roles/>
							</Author>
							<Author AffiliationID="A2">
								<GivenName>Ellen</GivenName>
								<Initials/>
								<FamilyName>Visser</FamilyName>
								<Degrees/>
								<Roles/>
							</Author>
							<Affiliation AFFID="A1">
								<OrgDivision/>
								<OrgName>Leiden University, Netherlands</OrgName>
								<OrgAddress/>
							</Affiliation>
							<Affiliation AFFID="A2">
								<OrgDivision/>
								<OrgName>Content-The Hague, Netherlands</OrgName>
								<OrgAddress/>
							</Affiliation>
						</AuthorGroup>
						<Abstract Language="En">Employees (&lt;i&gt;N&lt;/i&gt; = 178) completed a questionnaire to evaluate performance appraisal sessions. Hypotheses derived from procedural justice theories were confirmed. Neutrality, standing, trust, and accuracy of information correlated positively with perceived procedural justice of PA sessions. Quality of outcomes of PA sessions also co-varied with perceived fairness. Moreover, personal power bases of supervisors (expert power, referent power) contributed to employees' procedural justice perceptions. Perceived procedural justice correlated, as predicted, positively with three outcome variables: satisfaction with PA session; organizational commitment; and motivation.</Abstract>
					</ArticleHeader>
				</Article>
			</Issue>
		</Volume>
	</Journal>
</Publisher>
