AI Resource Allocation: On the Contribution of Distributive and Procedural Fairness

This study investigates how users perceive AI-driven decision-making systems in resource allocation contexts based on three key factors: outcome favorability, transparency, and task type. We conducted an online experiment with a 2 (outcome: favorable vs. unfavorable) x 3 (transparency: low vs. balanced vs. high) mixed design across four different resource allocation scenarios that reflected tasks perceived as more mechanical versus more human (N = 929). Our Bayesian linear mixed-effects models revealed that outcome favorability was the strongest single predictor of perceived fairness, trust, acceptance, and behavioral intention to use the respective AI. Task type (perceived “humanness”) further influenced user perceptions and additionally interacted with outcome favorability and transparency. Surprisingly and in contrast to prior studies, we found evidence against a main effect of transparency. Our findings highlight the critical importance of AI-based resource allocation performance, that is, outcome optimization, for users’ perception of corresponding AI systems. Conversely, the impact of transparency on user perceptions appears to be even more nuanced than previously thought.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-11-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3765766.3765776
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.37
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI Resource Allocation: On the Contribution of Distributive and Procedural Fairness

C.J.M. van Esch, D. Werner, Elisabeth Kals, Christina U. Pfeuffer
1 citations
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
article

AI Resource Allocation: On the Contribution of Distributive and Procedural Fairness

C.J.M. van Esch, D. Werner, Elisabeth Kals, Christina U. Pfeuffer
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This study investigates how users perceive AI-driven decision-making systems in resource allocation contexts based on three key factors: outcome favorability, transparency, and task type. We conducted an online experiment with a 2 (outcome: favorable vs. unfavorable) x 3 (transparency: low vs. balanced vs. high) mixed design across four different resource allocation scenarios that reflected tasks perceived as more mechanical versus more human (N = 929). Our Bayesian linear mixed-effects models revealed that outcome favorability was the strongest single predictor of perceived fairness, trust, acceptance, and behavioral intention to use the respective AI. Task type (perceived “humanness”) further influenced user perceptions and additionally interacted with outcome favorability and transparency. Surprisingly and in contrast to prior studies, we found evidence against a main effect of transparency. Our findings highlight the critical importance of AI-based resource allocation performance, that is, outcome optimization, for users’ perception of corresponding AI systems. Conversely, the impact of transparency on user perceptions appears to be even more nuanced than previously thought.

Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.