For me or against me?: reactions to AI (vs. human) decisions that are favorable or unfavorable to the self and the role of fairness perception

Abstract

Public reactions to algorithmic decisions often diverge. While high-profile media coverage suggests that the use of AI in organizational decision-making is viewed as unfair and received negatively, recent survey results suggest that such use of AI is perceived as fair and received positively. Drawing on fairness heuristic theory, the current research reconciles this apparent contradiction by examining the roles of decision outcome and fairness perception on individuals’ attitudinal (Studies 1–3, 5) and behavioral (Study 4) reactions to algorithmic (vs. human) decisions. Results from six experiments (N = 2,794) showed that when the decision was unfavorable, AI was perceived as fairer than human, leading to a less negative reaction. This heightened fairness perception toward AI is shaped by its perceived unemotionality. Furthermore, reminders about the potential biases of AI in decision-making attenuate the differential fairness perception between AI and human. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.