The International Journal of Conflict Management zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP 2000, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 106-134 WHEN WILL GRIEVANTS DESIRE VOICE?: A TEST OF SITUATIONAL, MOTIVATIONAL, AND ATTRIBUTIONAL EXPLANATIONS Bruce Barry Vanderbilt University Debra L. Shapiro University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Justice research has established that voice enhances procedural jus- tice—a phenomenon known as the "voice effect''—through both instru- mental and non-instrumental mechanisms. However, limited research attention has been devoted to the underlying motivational bases for the operation of one or the other explanatory mechanism in a given situa- tion. We report the findings of two laboratory studies examining situ- ational, motivational, and attributional underpinnings for the voice effect. We found that motivation to voice varied with characteristics of the authority to whom a grievance is directed. In both studies, an inter- action revealed that non-instrumental motivation for voice is more important when instrumental motivation is lacking or unavailable. In Study 2, we introduce the role of social attributions into research on the voice effect, finding that grievants' judgments about their objectives in using voice vary with the attributions they make about the motives behind the authority's actions. We discuss implications of our findings for both theory and practice. Providing opportunities to voice grievances is a key factor in eliciting per- ceptions of procedural justice from individuals who experience the prospect of adverse outcomes (see Lind & Tyler, 1988; Shapiro, 1993; Tyler & Lind, 1992, for reviews). The value of enhancing procedural justice has application in a variety of everyday situations where grievants appeal to authorities for help avoiding unfa- vorable outcomes, such as interactions with courts, law enforcement agencies, Note: We acknowledge support for the first author from the Dean's Fund for Faculty Research at the Owen Graduate School of Management at Vanderbilt University. We thank William P. Smith and members of the Interdisciplinary Social Psychology Seminar at Vanderbilt University for helpful comments.