Algorithmic fairness is a core principle of trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI), yet how people perceive fairness in AI decision-making remains understudied. Prior research suggests that moral and fairness judgments are egocentrically biased, favoring self-interested outcomes. Drawing on the Computers Are Social Actors (CASA) framework and egocentric ethics theory we examine whether this bias extends to AI decision-makers, comparing fairness and morality perceptions of AI and human agents. Across three experiments (two preregistered, N = 1880, Prolific US samples), participants evaluated financial decisions made by AI or human agents. Self-interest was manipulated by assigning participants to conditions where they either benefited from, were harmed by, or remained neutral to the decision outcome. Results showed that self-interest significantly biased fairness judgments—decision-makers who made unfair but personally beneficial decisions were perceived as more moral and fairer than those whose decisions benefited others (Studies 1 & 2) or those who made fair but personally costly decisions (Study 3). However, this egocentric bias was weaker for AI than for humans, mediated by a lower perceived mind and reduced liking for AI (Studies 2 & 3). These findings suggest that fairness judgments of AI are not immune to egocentric biases, but are moderated by cognitive and social perceptions of AI versus humans. Our studies challenge the assumption that algorithmic fairness alone is sufficient for achieving fair outcomes. This provides novel insight for AI deployment in high-stakes decision-making domains, highlighting the need to consider both algorithmic fairness and human biases when evaluating AI decisions.
Rumination, mind-wandering (MW), and daydreaming are maladaptive task-unrelated thoughts (TUT). All three processes are transdiagnostic, making them one of the targets of processed-based CBT. Although extant empirical data supports many mechanisms underlying maladaptive features of TUT, one primary mechanism – avoidance still lacks convincing empirical evidence. The present study aimed to test, from a longitudinal perspective, the mediator role of cognitive avoidance in the link between rumination, daydreaming, MW, and their maladaptive outcomes (depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbance). Additionally, the study will test the role of beliefs on emotions/rumination and inhibitory control in those models.
397 volunteers filled in a series of self-reported questionnaires in two waves with a 3-month interval. The results suggest that cognitive avoidance plays a mediator role in the link between MW or daydreaming and anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbance. However, these mediation models were not significant for rumination. Moreover, beliefs about perseverative cognition moderated the MW mediation model.
This is the first study suggesting that avoidance mechanisms and beliefs on cognition controllability might differentiate types of TUT and their impact on psychopathology symptoms. However, the results are based only on self-reported measures, which is particularly challenging for measuring avoidance.
The purpose of this study is to examine the elements and mediums through which Korean monks legitimize and popularize the newly invented tradition of t’aea yŏngga ch’ŏndojae – the Korean Buddhist death rite for sending the spirit of the unborn child, that has developed in Korea over the past three decades. This article will focus on the t’aea yŏngga ch’ŏndojae tradition from Kudam Temple, and on several elements, like scriptures, belief in a deity called Kwijamosin, and miraculous narratives that play a key role in the process of creating and establishing a new sacred tradition.
The article centres on the analysis of online expressions of solidarity during periods of polycrisis. Utilizing a distinctive longitudinal dataset of tweets collected over a three-year span (March 2020 to March 2023), this study addresses two primary questions: (1) how, and in relation to what events or actors was solidarity discussed by Twitter users in Poland, and (2) how did the various types and themes of solidarity expressions evolve over time. The analysis is theoretically informed by a descriptive-analytical framework for examining solidarity within a social media context. Methodologically, the study employs topic modelling combined with qualitative analysis and interpretation. Three meta-topics (international crisis solidarity, national crisis solidarity, and social solidarity with politically vulnerable groups) are identified and discussed, highlighting their relevance to the evolving reality of polycrisis.
