Procedural Justice
2
Abstract
Maintaining the legitimacy of decision making processes in the eyes of participants is a
key objective of creditable public involvement efforts; however, satisfying participants can be
difficult, especially when competing interests are at stake. Research suggests that attention to
procedural justice may offer one way to increase satisfaction and outcome acceptance.
Procedural justice argues that people care about the fairness of the procedures, and research has
shown that when procedures are viewed as fair, people are more satisfied with the process and
accepting of the outcomes – at times, even when they do not get the outcomes they desire. Using
survey data from attendees at 11 U.S. Food and Drug Administration advisory committee
meetings, we tested whether procedural justice judgments predicted satisfaction with the FDA
and its advisory committees and acceptance of advisory committee meeting outcomes. We also
examined how contextual factors – namely, procedural knowledge, tolerance for potential
conflicts of interest among advisory committee members, and participants’ stakes in the
outcomes, influenced the results. The findings supported a strong role for procedural justice
perceptions in predicting satisfaction and outcome acceptance among meeting attendees.
Convention