Decoding fairness: Unveiling the cognitive processes that determine pay rises and promotions

Drawing on attribution theory, this study explores how employees explain organizational decisions concerning pay rises and promotions, conceptualizing these attributional processes as an interpretive layer that precedes fairness evaluations, and how distinct configurations of causal explanations are associated with work-related attitudes. The research was conducted in an Italian bank, leveraging on a two-wave design and a two-study structure. The full sample ( N = 3193) was randomly split into two equivalent subsamples. Study 1 ( n = 1540) used latent profile analysis to identify three attribution profiles: meritocratic attributors profile , the institutional attributors profile, and the relational-structural attributors profile. Study 2 ( n = 1599) replicated the profile structure, assessed their longitudinal stability and tested associations with demographic and work-related predictors as well as key work outcomes. Study 2 shows that the meritocratic attributors profile and the relational-structural attributors profile are both stable over time, while the institutional attributors profile is more fluid. Demographic and work-related factors were associated with profile membership. Older employees and those in higher positions were more likely to belong to profiles emphasizing competence-based or institutionalized explanations, whereas younger employees and women were more often associated with profiles emphasizing relational and structural explanations, such as networks and gender dynamics. Our findings also reveal that attribution profiles are associated with different attitudes toward work. Employees in the meritocratic attributors profile reported the highest levels of work engagement, affective organizational commitment, distributive justice, and trust in management. These levels were lowest among employees in the relational-structural attributors profile, consistent with the idea that explanations centered on relational dynamics and structural constraints are associated with less favourable evaluations of organizational decisions.