Does Justice Need to be in the Eyes of Both Beholders? Examining Face-to-Face and Virtual Negotiators' Interactional Justice Congruence

We build from justice and negotiation scholars' historical interest in interpersonal interactions and reciprocity to develop the notion of interactional justice congruence, which refers to the degree of reciprocity in negotiation dyad members' respectful and truthful treatment of one another. Yet, media richness theory holds that communication media differ in their provision of social cues and ability to interpret subjective information such as justice perceptions. Integrating social exchange theory tenets with media richness theory, we examine how communication medium influences the effects of negotiators' interactional justice congruence on their dyadic economic and social-psychological outcomes. Moderated polynomial regression and response surface analyses of data from 199 face-to-face and virtual negotiation dyads revealed that face to-face dyads' relationship conflict and outcome inequality were minimized when negotiators' interpersonal and informational justice perceptions were congruent-even if both negotiators perceived one another be disrespectful or deceptive. Virtual negotiation dyads did not experience this benefit. This suggests justice functions differently at the dyadic level in negotiations, such that justice needs to be similarly perceived by both face-to-face negotiators in order to produce dyadic benefits.