Until recently, adherence to interpersonal justice rules (i.e., treating employees with respect and dignity) during decision-based outcomes has been found to lead to increased perceptions of fairness. I replicated an experiment that found when minority (African American and Hispanic) supervisors adhered to interpersonal justice rules, they were rated as less fair than subordinates with Caucasian supervisors. Perceptions of fairness towards minority supervisors explained the relationship between supervisor race and bias (measured as subordinates engaging in undermining behaviors). The stereotype of deceit explained the relationship between supervisor race and perceptions of fairness. I extended this study by changing the way supervisor race was manipulated. The original study manipulated race with stereotypical names, and I used stereotypical pictures with no names. Using the same statistical analyses as the original study, the present replication study found no support for any of the three original hypotheses. The extended race manipulation may indicate that pictures and names are not interchangeable manipulations for race. The study also has practical implications for management, as it may provide a sign of relief that interpersonal justice may not be the double-edged sword for minority supervisors that Zapata et al. (2016) indicated. However, more replication studies are needed to research these contradictory findings. Potential explanations and limitations of the replication study were discussed.
