# How Reputation Systems Change the Psychological Antecedents of Fairness in Virtual Environments
## 1 Introduction
### Aims of the Study and Hypothesis  
Inspired by the work of [PERSON] et al. [21], where the effects of reputation on fair allocations and trust dynamics in an online bargaining game were tested, we employed the same experimental paradigm to investigate which socio-psychological characteristics can be identified as the antecedents of fairness. The bargaining game has been developed to study and quantify pro-social gossip dynamics. In this scenario, a third-party observer may or may not share negative evaluations about a target exploitative/negative behavior to stop it and thus increase overall cooperation [54]. Pro-social-gossip dynamics are, for instance, an essential part of forum content moderation [55,56] and third-party product review [57]. In the latter case, reputation is already used to deal with spam reviews and the subsequent gradual credibility loss of the system [58]. The environment characteristics where pro-social gossip occurs appeared to affect people's fairness in a non-trivial way. Indeed, the previous work of [PERSON] and colleagues [21] showed that reputation did not affect Observer's behavior (and consequently pro-social gossip levels) but rather the one of those actors who were not targeted by the reputation (i.e., proposers). Thus, fairness increased while pro-social gossip remained stable. According to their results, in social dilemma games, Proposers, respectively, those who propose a deal to the Receivers, adjust their allocation behavior basing themselves on the mere existence of a reputational system, even if it does not concern them (i.e., it was dedicated to other game's roles). In other words, players appeared to allocate more resources when reputation was involved in the game, although they did not have any reputation to manage or reputational benefits from acting pro-socially. Therefore, the present work aims at extending previous pieces of evidence about the social influence exerted by reputation, using the social dilemmas framework. In particular, it investigates which socio-demographic and psychological characteristics produce an increase in fair behaviors among Proposers. Furthermore, it also explores which personality traits are associated with fairness by referring to the Big Five, distinguishing between two different game's contexts: with or without the reputational system. In the light of the literature results, we propose the following hypothesis, summarized in Table 1.  
**Hypothesis 1** (H1). : _Following the results of [PERSON] et al. [32] on the relation between personality and cooperation in the Resource dilemma scenario and the evidence reported by [PERSON] et al. [34], we hypothesize that when the bargaining game involves reputation, individuals who report high levels of neuroticism and openness will not behave fairly given their scarce susceptibility to social norms (i.e., reputation makes the norm of the bargaining game salient). Coherently with [PERSON] et al. [32], [PERSON] et al. [34], and [PERSON], [PERSON], and [PERSON] [33] it can be assumed that players characterized by high scores of agreeableness will likely report the highest levels of Fairness, along with conscientious individuals [34; 35]. Finally, given the peculiar context of the bargaining game and the scarce susceptibility of extroverted individuals to social norms, we suggest that participants defined by this personality trait will not play fair [34]._  
**Hypothesis 2** (H2). : _In accordance with previous research findings on age in the bargaining context [21], we hypothesize that with as the participants' age grows, fair behaviors will be more frequently performed. We expect Fairness to be fostered by age and maturity, along with previous scientific pieces of evidence [21]._  
**Hypothesis 3** (H3). : _Self-Efficacy prevents fair behaviors in competitive settings. A reduction of fairness is expected in the bargaining game context with no reputational system given the association between Self-Efficacy and competitiveness [49].