# How Reputation Systems Change the Psychological Antecedents of Fairness in Virtual Environments
## 3 Results
### Effects of Socio-Demographic and Psychological Characteristics on Fairness  
Intending to indicate the antecedents of Fairness, this subsection presents the variables that influence the Proposer's fair behavior in an online bargaining game when reputation is present (or \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Predictors of the Offer**} \\ \hline
**Best Model** & **Akaike** & **F** & **df-1 (2)** \\ \hline Offer Rep OFF & 4027.520 & 10.482 *** & 3 (1516) \\ Offer Rep ON & 4148.733 & 8.333 *** & 6 (1527) \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Fixed coefficients for Rep OFF_} \\ \hline
**Factors** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Coefficient (\(\beta\))**} & **Student t** & \(p\).** \\ \hline Extraversion & 0.027 & 3.50 & 0.001 \\ Age & 0.011 & 2.19 & 0.029 \\ Gender (M) & 0.152 & 3.20 & 0.001 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Fixed coefficients for Rep ON_} \\ \hline
**Factors** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Coefficient (\(\beta\))**} & **Student t** & \(p\).** \\ \hline Extraversion & \(-0.029\) & \(-3.46\) & 0.001 \\ Agreaebaleness & \(-0.028\) & \(-3.87\) & 0.001 \\ Conscientiousness & 0.021 & 3.31 & 0.001 \\ Neuroticism & 0.019 & 2.92 & 0.004 \\ Sense of Community & 0.017 & 3.47 & 0.001 \\ Self-Efficacy & 0.026 & 3.61 & 0.001 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{*** = \(p<0.001\); df = degrees of freedom.} \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: GLMM 1. Socio-demographic and Psychological predictors of offer behavior in each condition. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Predictors of the Request**} \\ \hline
**Best Model** & **Akaike** & **F** & **df-1 (2)** \\ \hline Request Rep OFF & 3239.906 & 7528 *** & 3 (1286) \\ Request Rep ON & 3331.380 & 18,604 *** & 6 (1309) \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Fixed coefficients for Rep OFF_} \\ \hline
**Factors** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Coefficient (\(\beta\))**} & **Student t** & \(p\).** \\ \hline Extraversion & 0.022 & 2.73 & 0.006 \\ Agreeableness & \(-0.017\) & \(-2.76\) & 0.006 \\ Closeness & 0.024 & 3.42 & 0.001 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Fixed coefficients for Rep ON_} \\ \hline
**Factors** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Coefficient (\(\beta\))**} & **Student t** & \(p\).** \\ \hline Extraversion & \(-0.032\) & \(-3.98\) & 0.001 \\ Agreeableness & \(-0.017\) & \(-2.38\) & 0.017 \\ Closeness & \(-0.020\) & \(-2.87\) & 0.004 \\ Neuroticism & 0.033 & 4.60 & 0.001 \\ Self-Efficacy & 0.029 & 3.97 & 0.001 \\ Age & \(-0.079\) & \(-8.68\) & 0.001 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} *** = \(p<0.001\); df = degrees of freedom.  
\end{table} 
Table 5: GLMM 2. Socio-demographic and Psychological predictors of request behavior in each condition. missing) during the interactions. We verify which socio-demographic and psychological variables impact fair behaviors and if the presence of a reputational system in this context would affect them using the Generalized Linear Mixed Models. Participants' Fairness is calculated by subtracting Requests from Offers. In other words, it represents the difference between the number of resources the Proposers ask and allocate. Table 6 shows that when the reputational system is missing, people with high Sense of Community seem to be fairer during bargaining interactions. In contrast, individuals who distinguish themselves for their high levels of Self-Efficacy tend to offer less than they request (i.e., behaving unfairly). Age also plays a role in determining participants' Fairness. In particular, older players tend to play more fairly than younger ones. When reputation characterizes the game context, Sense of Community and Age preserve their positive effects on fair behaviors, although the beta coefficient of the Sense of Community may suggest a milder effect of this construct on Fairness. At the same time, closed individuals appear to be fair bargainers, probably thanks to their tendency to ask for fewer resources when reputation is involved, while Neuroticism seems to hinder fair behaviors. No effects of Self-Efficacy emerge for this condition.