Acceso usuarios
Rémy A. Furrer, Timothy D. Wilson, Daniel T. Gilbert
Random procedures, such as coin flips, are used to settle disputes and allocate resources in a fair manner. Even though the outcome is random, we hypothesized that people would be sensitive to features of the process that make it seem unfair, that is, who gets to call heads or tails and flip the coin. In 11 studies (N = 5,925) participants competed against another participant for a positive or negative outcome, determined by a physical or virtual coin flip. The independent variable was who called heads or tails and flipped the coin: the participant or their opponent. When participants lost the flip, we found an illusion of unfairness: They reported that the process was less fair, were less pleased with their outcome, and found the other person less likable when their opponent flipped the coin. When participants won the flip, they thought it was less fair, and they felt guiltier when they had flipped the coin. We present evidence that these fairness judgments were based on both illusory procedural control (the person who flips the coin appears to have an unfair advantage by virtue of executing the flip before the outcome is known) and illusory outcome control (the belief that the flipper can influence the outcome of the flip). Further, the illusion of unfairness appears to be a quick, intuitive process that is not easily corrected. We discuss the implications of these findings for research on procedural justice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)
