ABSTRACT OXENDINE, DAVID BRYAN. The Effects of Social Exclusion Threat and Justifications on Perceived Fairness of an Ethnic Validation Procedure: Implications for Lumbee Federal Recognition. (Under the direction of Rupert W. Nacoste.) The purpose of the current study was to explore the effects of social exclusion threat negative affect on the evaluated fairness of a procedure that functions to validate ethnic membership using the Dimensional Voice Model (Bane, 1994). Participants consisted of 120 (60 = female, 60 = male) college students. The study design was a 2 (Gender) X 2 (Justification) X 3 (Procedure) factorial between-groups experimental design. Based on social exclusion theory, individuals may experience high levels of negative affect when they perceive a threat of exclusion from a group (Baumeister & Tice, 1990). It was hypothesized that a procedure designed to validate ethnic membership will result in social exclusion threat negative affect. A procedure designed to validate ethnic membership was hypothesized as being evaluated as unfair (Thibaut, Walker, LaTour, & Houlden, 1974; Lind & Tyler, 1988; Tyler, 1990, 1994; Tyler & Lind, 1994; Walker, LaTour, Lind, & Thibaut, 1974). Justifications (Bies, 1987a, 1987b, 1989; Bies & Moag, 1986; Bies & Shapiro, 1987, 1988; Brotheridge, 2003; Skarlicki, Folger & Gee, 2004) before the procedure was tested as the rationale for the procedure introduced as procedural justification. Of two procedural justifications, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Science Foundation (NSF) justification was hypothesized as being perceived fairer. The results suggest that procedures designed to validate ethnic membership were evaluated as unfair. Additionally, the results indicated that procedural justifications might affect perceptions of fairness of the procedure. The data strongly supports the notion that these procedures may create an environment of negative affect with respondents evaluating the procedures as unfair. Implications for Lumbee Federal Recognition are discussed. ©2004 David Bryan Oxendine THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL EXCLUSION THREAT AND JUSTIFICATIONS ON PERCEIVED FAIRNESS OF AN ETHNIC VALIDATION PROCEDURE: IMPLICATIONS FOR LUMBEE FEDERAL RECOGNITION by DAVID BRYAN OXENDINE A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of North Carolina State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy PSYCHOLOGY Raleigh 2004 APPROVED BY: _________________________________ _________________________________ Craig C. Brookins, PhD James E. Luginbuhl, PhD _________________________________ _________________________________ Samuel S. Snyder, PhD Rupert W. Nacoste, PhD Chair of Advisory Committee ii DEDICATION This work is dedicated to Lumbee Indians everywhere in their quest for complete and full Lumbee Federal Recognition. I also dedicate this work to my parents, the late Grady G. Oxendine and Lettie Mae Harris Oxendine and their lifelong love of education. iii BIOGRAPHY David Bryan Oxendine is a Lumbee Indian doctoral student in the Psychology Department at North Carolina State University. He received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Drama with a minor in Speech from Catawba College in 1982. David earned a professional degree from the American Academy of Dramatic Arts in New York City in 1987. In 1995 he received his Master of Science degree in Counselor Education from North Carolina State University. David is the younger of two children born to the late Grady G. Oxendine and Lettie Mae Harris Oxendine, both retired educators of Pembroke, North Carolina. His sister Donna Jean Locklear, also a retired educator lives in Pembroke with her husband Clyde. They have three children: Nicole is an educator, LaDonna is an undergraduate student in the Teacher Education Program at the University of North Carolina at Pembroke, and Brandon is a graduate of North Carolina State University and is a meteorologist at the National Weather Forecast Center in Raleigh, North Carolina. David’s hobbies include photography in which he won a Life magazine contest in 1990. He was also commissioned to create an original photographic exhibit depicting Lumbee Indian values for the Mint Museum of Art in Charlotte, North Carolina. His photographs have also been used in several textbooks, Time-Life books and most recently the Smithsonian Institution’s Handbook of the North American Indian. David has for 13 years been the Artistic Director for the Outdoor Drama Strike At The Wind! which depicts the Lumbee Indians during the Civil War. David is currently Assessment Coordinator and Assistant Professor at the University of North Carolina at Pembroke in the School of Education. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisory committee for their support and guidance: Dr. Craig C. Brookins, Dr. James E. Luginbuhl, Dr. Samuel S. Snyder and Dr. Rupert W. Nacoste. Through the excellence of Dr. Craig C. Brookins I have come to truly understand how all peoples of color share a common history. His course Psychology of the African Experience has inspired me to design and create a similar course in the future concerning the Lumbee experience. I also appreciate the straightforward manner of Dr. James E. Luginbuhl. I remember his course in Advanced Social Psychology with his discussions concerning juries and how it impacted me when I found myself in the jury box. Dr. Samuel S. Snyder was the only person I knew when I entered the Psychology doctoral program fresh from my Masters. I have always appreciated his dry, sharp wit. I am forever in both your debts. This entire episode in my life would not have been a truly interdependent experience without the leadership and friendship of Dr. Rupert W. Nacoste. Our meetings at Border’s bookstore off Wake Forest road became a haven for us both. When the work with the dissertation was complete for each meeting, we would spend hours discussing any number of topics including politics, religion, and the social interdependence of life. I would also like to thank Darnell Johnson who always greeted you with a smile. Whenever I needed to know something I could always email or make a phone to her. Finally, this project could not have been completed without the wonderful support I received from my family and friends. I also want to thank a person who supported me professionally, personally and emotionally…Cammie Hunt. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………….………..vii LIST OF FIGURES………………………………...………………………….……………..xi INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………….1 The Example Case………………………………………………….……….…………1 LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………..……….………………...3 Self-Concept, Ethnic Identity and Group Identity………………..………….…………3 Procedural Justice………………………….…..…………………….……….………...4 Decision and Process Control………..………………………………..………………..7 Truth and Justice…………………….…….……….….………………………………..9 Group Conflict…………………..….……..…………..……..………………………..13 Group-Value Model………..……………...……………………………….………….14 Procedural Justice and Social Standing……………………………………………….15 Interdependence Theory………………………….…………………………………...16 Social Status and Group Membership………………………………………………...18 The Relational Model of Authority……………………………….……………..……19 The Dimensional Voice Model…………………………………….….……………....22 Social Exclusion Theory……..…………………….………………………………….24 Justifications……………………………….………………………...…..…….……...25 The Current Research………………………………………..…..…………………….26 Hypothesis 1…………………………………………………………………..28 Hypothesis 2…………………………………………………………………..28 Hypothesis 3…………………………………………………………………..28 Hypothesis 4……………………………………………………….………….28 Hypothesis 5…………………………………………………………………..29 Hypothesis 6…………………………………………………………………..29 METHOD………………………………………………..……….………………………….30 Participants……………….……………………………..…………..….……………..30 Design………………………………………………….……………….……………..30 Procedure……………………………………………………………………………...32 Measures………………………………………………………………………………39 RESULTS…………………………………………………………………..………………..42 Data Analysis………………………………………………………………………...42 Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS)………..….…….…..…………46 Analysis of Factorial Design: A Cautionary Note…..…………………………….…49 vi Page Manipulation Checks……………………………………………………….…..……50 Procedural Fairness………………………………………………………….50 Procedural Satisfaction………………………………………………………55 Hypothesis Testing……………………………………………………………….…..57 General Fairness……………………………………………………………...57 True Voice………….……...……...……...…………….……………….…...58 Misvoice…………………..……………………………………………….....61 Forced Voice………………………………………………………………....63 Positive and Negative Affect………………………………………………...64 Subsidiary Analysis……………………………………………………………….…72 Accuracy…………………………………………………………….………..72 Procedural Process Control……………………………………….………….77 Procedural Agreement……………………………………………….……….77 Procedural Information Control……………………………………….……..78 DISCUSSION………………………………….…………………………………………….80 Hypotheses…………………………………………………………………………..82 Hypothesis 1…………………………………………………………………..82 Hypothesis 6………………………….……………………………………….84 Hypothesis 2…………………………………………………………………..85 Hypothesis 3…………………………………………………………………..87 Hypothesis 4…………………………………………………………………..89 Hypothesis 5…………………………………………………………………..90 Limitations……………………………………………………………………….….92 Internal Validity……………………………………………………………….92 External Validity………………………………………………………………93 Theoretical and Applied Implications………….……………………………………93 Social Exclusion Theory………….……….….……………………………….95 Justifications………………………………………………..…………………95 The Example Case: Lumbee Federal Recognition………………….…………96 Implications for Future Research……………………………….…………………...98