The present thesis describes 11 studies that investigate: (1) What people construe as nepotism, (2) the consequences of perceived nepotism in organizational and political contexts, and (3) why... Show moreThe present thesis describes 11 studies that investigate: (1) What people construe as nepotism, (2) the consequences of perceived nepotism in organizational and political contexts, and (3) why nepotism remains common practice, despite the negative connotations attached to it. I provide answers to these questions using a ‘procedural fairness perspective’ of nepotism as an alternative to the more common ‘meritocracy perspective’ of nepotism. The eleven studies revealed several important points. First, people view nepotism as the hiring, promotion, or favorable treatment of family members, regardless of competence. Second, people view nepotism as more unfair than cronyism. Third, perceived nepotism can be deleterious in business organizations and the political arena. In business organizations, nepotism may lead to a negative organizational climate. In politics, nepotism can increase cynicism and decrease people’s willingness to be politically active. Fourth, people use known traits or qualifications of benefactors to infer the traits or qualifications of beneficiaries, and this may result in support for nepotism, particularly among people who believe in the merit of nepotism. Show less
Governments worldwide are regularly faced with severe weather conditions and disasters caused by natural hazards. Does the way in which governments respond to disasters affect their legitimacy? The... Show moreGovernments worldwide are regularly faced with severe weather conditions and disasters caused by natural hazards. Does the way in which governments respond to disasters affect their legitimacy? The current study investigated how evaluations of authorities were influenced by four aspects of a governmental response to a hypothetical disaster. In a survey experiment participants read a scenario in which a government distributed aid in the aftermath of a flooding. Data were collected from the Netherlands, France, Poland, Ukraine, and Russia (N = 2,677). Results showed that the government was seen as more legitimate when it was described as distributing resources fairly, following fair procedures, and providing a material benefit to the participant. However, in contrast to predictions derived from system‐justification theory, results showed that outcome dependence was associated with reduced legitimacy. These findings suggest that response policies that address both instrumental and fairness concerns might help maintain positive evaluations of governments. Show less
