Moderating the Interaction Between Procedural Justice and Decision Frame: The Counterbalancing Effect of Personality Traits

Abstract

This study examined the framing effect of decision making in contexts in which the issue of social justice matters as well as the moderating effects of personality traits on the relationship between justice and framing effects. The authors manipulated procedural justice and outcome valence of the decision frame within two vignettes and measured two personality traits (self-efficacy and anxiety) of participants. The results from 363 participants showed that the moderating effects of personality traits counterbalanced the interaction between justice and framing, such that for individuals with high self-efficacy/low trait anxiety, justice effects were larger in negative framing than in positive framing; those with the opposite disposition exhibited the opposite pattern. These effects were interpreted in terms of an attribution process as the information processing strategy. The aforementioned findings suggest that the justice and decision theories can be developed to account for the moderating effects of personality traits. Some limitations of this study and the direction of future research are also discussed.

The Impact of Artificial Intelligence Replacing Humans in Making Human Resource Management Decisions on Fairness: A Case of Resume Screening

“…Therefore, it is necessary to explore the factors that may interact with decision-makers to influence the perception of fairness, that is, the boundary conditions that have received less attention in previous studies. In particular, people may focus more on the outcome of the decisions than the process [9,10].…”

“…According to the behavioral decision theory of individuals, when people make poor decisions, they reconstruct the decision-making process, intensify the situation in which they are making the decision, and conduct a more thorough decision-analysis process to find out why they received the results they did [9]. In other words, negative outcomes make people pay closer attention to the decision-making process, which is when AI's potentially more unfair flaws are highlighted and people react more strongly to the decision's perceived unfairness [10].…”

“…The "outcome bias" postulates that people prioritize assessing a decision's outcome over considering its process because they are more interested in the decision's outcome. In other words, the outcome of decisions may affect the degree to which various decision-makers' roles influence people's perceptions of fairness [9,10]. In addition, earlier research paid little attention to how the decisionmaker's traits influence people's psychological perceptions of decision making and the decision outcomes.…”