Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Fairness and emotion

Overview

This book chapter generally discussed about the relationship between the fairness and emotion that helps in determining the way fairness has direct impact on emotion of individuals that are living in society. Furthermore, a theoretical perspectives explaining the manner in which fairness have relationship with emotions.

Fairness is just and reasonable treatment in relation with accepted rules and principles that focus on treating all the individuals living in the society on equal and just manner. Each and every individuals have its own emotions such as sad, happy and many others that need to be effectively managed to effectively handle the adverse situation. In the eye of the law, every individual is equal so they need to be provided equal opportunities to grow and expand in organisation and achieve greater height in future scenario

Focus questions

What is fairness?

What is emotion?
What is the relationship between fairness and emotions?
The theological perspectives of fairness
Positive and negative implications of fairness and emotions

What is Fairness?

Fairness has two primary meanings; one refers to an equal and fair state, nature, and condition, and the other refers to the state, shape, or quality of being fair, or free from injustice; the quality of treating people equally in a way that is right or reasonable. Since Rawls first published the article "Justice as Fairness" in 1985, especially after the publication of the subsequent book "Justice", the two concepts of "fairness" and "justice" have been widely used in Western academics. The world was inseparably linked together, and began to receive the attention of the academic world. Rawls' views on fairness are embodied in the two principles of justice he put forward; one is the principle of justice as fairness, and the other is the principle of difference (Marescaux, De Winne & Rofcanin, 2021).

Concept of fairness:

If equality is a concept of state and result, then fairness is a concept of procedure and process. If equality is a restrictive concept, it is strictly limited to basic personality and rights, important resources and necessary abilities; then, equity is an open concept, which is fully applicable to the distribution of all social resources and public rights. Fairness is the distribution of public rights and social resources according to the same principles, and the handling and evaluation of things according to the same principles. Social justice requires the establishment of a set of common standards for allocating resources and rights, and people follow the same procedures when allocating rights and resources. These standards and procedures are objective and not subjective. However, if resources and rights are allocated in accordance with fair principles and procedures, the result may sometimes be equal, but not necessarily equal. In other words, under certain conditions, equality is fair and inequality is unfair; in other cases, inequality is fair, but equality is unfair. For example, "My income and wealth are less than that of Bill Gates. If I am the poorest person in the United States, and I insist that the government should substantially narrow the huge gap between me and him, this seems to reflect a kind of jealousy instead of appealing for justice." (Matta, Erol‐Korkmaz, Johnson & Biçaksiz, 2014).

Theoretical perspectives of fairness:

In fact, the notion of utility will lead, two centuries later, to what is still considered the theory of rational choice in neoclassical economics today. This turning point occurs in the first half of the 20th century, when Von Neumann and Morgenstern, a physicist and an economist, starting from the theoretical foundations described so far, build a normative model of rational behavior, which also provides for the evaluation of alternatives in conditions of risk or uncertainty. This model recognizes that the actor in the decision-making process, intent on selecting the option with the highest expected utility, has the ability to estimate the probabilities of states in the world, treating them according to the rules of probability calculus. This model is based on some axioms that characterize the rationality of the choices of a hypothetical decision-maker, and which are based above all on the consistency in his preferences (Ismagilova, Dwivedi & Slade, 2020).

Fairness and decision making

In the large literature of studies on the brain bases of decision-making, the subgroup of studies that investigated the so-called "decision utility", i.e. the pure anticipation of outcomes without the expectation of immediate knowledge of the same, is central in this sense. The main object of these studies, in fact, is precisely the anticipation of the basic variables, that is, gains and losses. In a nutshell, the results of these studies showed that the anticipation of positive outcomes is associated with the activity of the ventral striatum, while the anticipation of possible losses is associated with activation of the amygdala, but without a unanimous view. One study, in particular, suggests that loss anticipation is associated with the deactivation of those same mesocorticolimbic areas involved in the evaluation of winnings (a "two-way" response), without however any specific activation of "emotional" regions such as the insula and amygdala (Barsky, Kaplan & Beal, 2011).

Fairness is subtle. Figure 1

Use of fairness and emotions in organizations:

The employee intuitively understands and accepts that a more experienced and qualified employee should be rewarded with a higher salary. It also refers to the fact that an employee in a megacity and an employee in a small city may have different salaries and conditions. By comparing these indicators with oneself and other people, people doing the same job, the person makes certain conclusions.

Adams' theory of justice shows that it all depends on how satisfied the person is with this comparative analysis. In other words, the employee's motivation depends on how right it is to see her position.

The question is who does a person compare with - employees of their own company or other companies in the city, in the countryside or perhaps with friends? Adams' theory of justice basically describes a confrontation between a person with people with a similar position and type of work. Sometimes the comparison occurs in the plan of works of a different nature, in which a person subjective evaluates the complexity of the work and payment. Everyone has their own level of receptivity to such a subjective concept as justice, sometimes simply realizing that "it is necessary" or "what to do, someone has to do this job". Everyone has their own comfort zone, which he calls fair. Some people prefer "equalization", others want to be one step higher than others and still others - one step below.

Yes, this subjective concept, like justice, there is a formula that runs John Adams' theory of justice. Of course, it does not describe the concept of universal justice, but justice from the point of view of the worker. As we see, the essence of the matter is very subjective, but this is inevitable if we consider concepts such as motivation, which describes the Adams theory of justice. In short, the validity can be described using the formula Employee Last / Employee Contribution = Other Workers' Result / Other Workers Contribution

The equality of the left and right halves of the equation can be called a point of justice. This means that the employee sees his reward for his contribution to fair work. This means that he will continue to show the same returns in his work, performing it at the same level. Otherwise, he will consider his position unfair - with insufficient or excess remuneration - with excess remuneration. Additionally, Adams admitted that it is possible to reassess the employee's contribution and performance. Simply put, a person can justify in his perception of payment, working conditions and shift his opinion towards equilibrium. But still many good specialists prefer to find a more decent payment for their work (Malc, Mumel & Pisnik, 2016).

Test your knowledge

Choose the correct answers and click "Submit":

What are emotions?

Joy, sadness, fear, anger, contempt, disgust, and interest are basic emotions and are part of everyday life, but their nature is elusive. What is certain is that they can get "out of control" and make it difficult (sometimes a lot) to live with themselves and with everyday life. This is why it is important to know their origin and their essence. Knowing how they are formed and what their function is the first and fundamental step in learning how to control them.

Feelings and emotions are often spoken of as being the same, but that's wrong. The former are "states" of mind, while the latter take shape in a "process". To be exact, emotions are a multi-component process and to put it another way, emotions are experiences which are made up of several elements which evolve over time. The component at the origin of emotions is the so-called "emotional antecedent", that is an internal stimulus (a thought, a memory, a mental image) or an external fact (a pleasant or unpleasant, surprising, frightening event and so on).

The hemogenic antecedent gives rise to an innate and non-mediated physiological reaction (arousal) that causes a series of changes in the organism. For example, redness of the face, acceleration of the heartbeat, change in breathing rhythm and so on. But at the same time, the internal or external triggering event is processed in a "more refined" way and determines a cognitive evaluation of the stimulus (appraisal).

The acquisition and "fine-tuning" of information leads to a modification of verbal and non-verbal expressions, triggers what is called a "tendency to action" and finally generates a series of behavioral responses appropriate to the situation (escape, combat and so on). Anger and fear, sadness and joy, surprise and expectation, disgust and acceptance are defined as "primary emotions" and give rise to "secondary or complex emotions" through various combinations. The function of emotions is to be found in their nature. The "father" of emotional intelligence, Daniel Goleman, describes them as "impulses to act": Emotions are action plans which evolution has endowed us with to manage life emergencies in real-time. The definition of the American psychologist and writer delves into the evolutionary value attributed to emotions by Charles Darwin and in fact identifies them as a solution to an adaptive problem. But emotions are not only a "means" for self-preservation and survival, but they also play a fundamental role in communication.

The range of non-mediated and mediated reactions set in motion by joy, fear and so on describes the condition of an individual to the outside world. To put it another way, emotions "speak" and create a link between those who live them and the surrounding world. Emotions are also an inner voice, a compass to find and maintain the path of personal fulfillment and happiness and an alarm bell when one lose their way.

Emotions are essential for navigating the rough sea of existence. But when they get too intense and get out of control, they turn from precious allies into fearsome enemies. Mostly it is difficult to realize the moment when they start to take over. However, it is possible to manage them to live them in their positive meaning. The first thing to do to avoid finding oneself at the mercy of emotions is to learn to recognize them. It may seem self-evident, but in reality it is anything but trivial. In other words, the way of expressing an emotion does not necessarily correspond to the emotion as such. As a practical example, crying can express anger, anger can express sadness, and so on (Malc, Selinšek, Dlačić & Milfelner, 2021).

Uncovering the beliefs generated in an uncontrolled way by the mind is essential for learning to dominate emotions. The "automatic thoughts" are caused by little or no self-awareness and identifying them allows one to re-lead them to a rational dimension and at the same time become aware of the desires and goals, the abilities, and limitations. From this process (which requires patience and perseverance) comes the crucial awareness that emotions do not define one's identity. Fear, anger, sadness and so on are events that influence and temporarily change one's way of being and acting and as such can be faced and controlled (McAuliffe, Blake, Steinbeis & Warneken, 2017).

Theoretical perspectives of emotions

Emotions fulfill a very specific purpose: They allow us to adapt to what surrounds us to ensure our survival. Charles Darwin had already said this at the time, showing us that animals also have and express emotions and that this gift allows us and them to progress as a species and collaborate to succeed.Darwin was probably one of the figures who best explained to us what emotions are and what function they have. However, along the course of history we also find other names, other approaches and other theories oriented to give us answers in this regard.

Below are categories of emotions.

Figure 2: Categories of emotions

Test your knowledge

Choose the correct answers and click "Submit":

What is the relationship between fairness and emotions?

The sense of guilt leads to rethinking the event that happened in a present characterized by thoughts of the past: It corresponds to not living everyday life. Exactly by fault we mean the constant rethinking of how a situation could have gone differently from how it unfolded. Hence, it is a continual bringing the past back into the present. Often we are grieved by things that we could have done and that due to various vicissitudes we have not done. In these cases, the emotion one feels is guilt. Guilt is an emotion that arises from a past event, consequently the process that determines and maintains it is brooding (Farthing, 2011).

Those who are afflicted by chronic guilt are totally engulfed in this negative state to the point of affecting their relational and social life. Exactly by fault we mean the constant rethinking of how a situation could have gone differently from how it unfolded. Therefore, it is a continuous bringing back the past in the present through images and thoughts related to the event (Rispens & Demerouti, 2016). Guilt is an emotion, whose purpose is to warn of events. If it becomes chronic, it becomes pathological and at this point it is necessary to question the way of dealing with situations and, above all, thoughts and behaviors, assuming one's responsibilities if necessary. Often times, however, it is not a question of real guilt, but of something called a sense of guilt. Guilt is distinguished from guilt because it tells us that things may not go our way, but we are not yet sure how they can end. It is a kind of anticipatory state of actual guilt. While, the guilt manifests itself in things that have happened, when there is nothing more to be done. Only at this point, when the sense of guilt is transformed footprint in real fault and it is not possible to remedy the incident, the negative emotion invades and pervades everything. In any case, these are emotions that have to do with the sphere of morality, and could ultimately lead to shame until the negative fact is remedied. Very often, it is not possible to remedy and at that point the only thing to do is to accept what happened without further brooding (Hegtvedt & Parris, 2014).

Guilt is an emotion, whose purpose is to warn of events. If it becomes chronic, it becomes pathological and at this point it is necessary to question the way of dealing with situations and, above all, thoughts and behaviors, assuming one's responsibilities if necessary. Often times, however, it is not a question of real guilt, but of something called a sense of guilt. Guilt is distinguished from guilt because it tells us that things may not go our way, but we are not yet sure how they can end. It is a kind of anticipatory state of actual guilt. While, the guilt manifests itself in things that have happened, when there is nothing more to be done. Only at this point, when the sense of guilt is transformed footprint in real fault and it is not possible to remedy the incident, the negative emotion invades and pervades everything. In any case, these are emotions that have to do with the sphere of morality, and could ultimately lead to shame until the negative fact is remedied. Very often, it is not possible to remedy and at that point the only thing to do is to accept what happened without further brooding (Hegtvedt & Parris, 2014).

Before reaching acceptance, however, it is necessary to manage the negative emotion by becoming familiar with it, knowing it and trying to understand what it is and how it acts. All this is undoubtedly very difficult to implement, because recognizing guilt means taking note of one's weaknesses and therefore questioning one's sense of self-efficacy. Furthermore, guilt can conceal a sense of omnipotence or perfection, Implemented through excessive control over reality. All this induces others to exercise power because by leveraging the sense of guilt they keep in check until the victim is brought to the abyss of guilt (Hegtvedt & Parris, 2014).

Frustration is the lack of gratification of a desire, or the impediment to the satisfaction of a need. It is a psychological state that occurs when an obstacle blocks the achievement of an end by an organism that is motivated to achieve that end. Embarrassment is a pro-social emotion. The experience of embarrassment is not at all pleasant and for this reason, even in the psychological field, it is considered a negative emotion. Like shame, sense of guilt, embarrassment relates to self-awareness, in the sense that, to experience this emotion, one needs to have developed cognitive skills that allow one to be able to critically detect the evaluations given by others on one own behavior. Embarrassment is such a powerful emotion, that it sometimes generates a state of anticipatory anxiety, capable of altering interactions between people and lifestyle (for example, through social withdrawal), and even lead, in the most serious cases, to psychopathological disorders (Mattila, Hanks & Wang, 2014).

Embarrassment is therefore essentially a way to apologize, through non-verbal language, in order to avoid too severe a judgment, or even an aggression. Even if it remains a painful emotion, therefore, it can be seen as a tool that performs important social functions. Erving Goffman (1956), argued that embarrassment is felt when individuals violate the norms of social behavior and deference present in social interactions. Within such situations, Goffman stated, showing embarrassment is not to be considered dysfunctionality, an irrational outlet, but a way of behaving capable of re-establishing social relations that appear to be compromised and making a commitment to follow those same rules in the future. According to other authors, the social function of this emotion goes far beyond simply apologizing through the body language discussed so far: the expression of embarrassment can in fact serve to signal to others the pro-social behavior of an individual (Hegtvedt & Parris, 2014).

Fairness and emotions are closely related with other in which change in one aspect will lead to impact the other. This can be understood as emotion of anger will to impact of decision of fair and unfair in which is being identified that with the mode of anger the decision of fairness and an identification of fair and unfair will not be able to get identified and determined (Zheng, Yang, Jin, Qi, & Liu, (2017). On the other hand, an emotion of happiness and influence towards the particular concept will also affect the aspect of decision making and fairness. This means with the aspect of this emotion a fair decision would be able to take place. This would be right to states that anger would act as negative emotion while happiness is considered as positive emotion. In the same way with the aspect of concerned emotion an individual psychology would be affected that would further lead to impact its decision making in terms of considering a particular aspect to be fair and unfair. This can further be supported with another view in which it would be right to said that if an individual is influenced with negative emotion i.e. anger then there are chances that the person will make rejection of most unlikely and unfair decision. This shows a negative aspect that is related with the concept of emotion and fairness. In the same way it is to be noted that with the aspect of negative emotion an individual’s decision will be affected in terms of determining the fair and unfair decision.

Positive and negative implications of fairness

Positive implications

Pro-social behavior is that which goes in the direction of sociability and not selfishness: It therefore includes the care and attention that a person places towards the well-being of others, in avoiding or preventing the discomfort of other people, in showing oneself trustworthy towards the commitments made, etc. Embarrassment can therefore be the obvious sign of knowledge and internalization of social norms and, seen in this sense, it can offer a series of social benefits: For example, it can lead to a positive reputation, recognition that compensates for the personal costs of altruistic behavior and makes the individual socially attractive, admissible in one's group.

Will machines have access to human moods? We now speak of "artificial empathy", that is "the ability of a computer system to form a representation of the emotional state of an interlocutor and at the same time be aware of the causal mechanism that induced that emotional state". Our emotions contain information: on reflection, we tend not to feel strong emotions for things that are not important to us. If we feel anxious about a job interview it is because that job is important for what it would represent for one's life; if we get angry at a rude response from our child it is because giving him a good education is a value for us; if we feel guilty for not having listened to a request for help from a friend, it is because the value of friendship and an ideal of justice we have are important to us. When we are open to difficult emotions, we are able to choose actions in line with our goals and our values. We should try to understand what emotion is telling us (Barclay, Bashshur & Fortin, 2017).

In organizations or business settings, promoting fairness enhance employees productivity as they are motivated to make optimum use of their existing skills and capabilities. They devote more and more time and energy to complete the assigned task in effective manner so that company can achieve its goals in limited time frame. Along with that, it helps in coordinating people to work in team rather than in segregated manner as it results in causing conflict and confusion to maximum extend. They did not like to work in team which create hindrance in effective operation of organisation in external environment (Roadevin, 2018). Fairness helps in improving employees turnover and retention within the firm as they feel proud when they are working for the organisation that ensure fairness among employees. Therefore, in short, this contribute in making the working environment much healthy and peaceful where all can easily work in team for desired outcome.

Fairness helps in building good relationship with suppliers as the manager through effectively following fair trade practice can have products and services in desire time frame and achieve greater height. Fairness is generally concerned with process, consequence and action that are morally right and equitable. Furthermore, fair decision is always being taken on the basis of appropriate criteria, such as people being selected on the basis of specific criteria that are used within company. Such as first application are encouraging to apply within the organisation, then screening is being done to select right candidate at right place for effective outcome.

Negative implications

With respect to the negative implication of fairness, individual would be highly negatively impacted regarding the unfair emotion. This is because the negative implication would lead to impact an individual in terms of raised negative emotions. It can be right to said that negative implication will lead to directly impact the decision making. This is because the negative fairness and an individual indulgence in it would lead to impact the decision that are being taken with the consideration of negative fairness. This will also affect the outcome of the decision. In the same way it is to be noted that the negative implication of fairness will also and always be negative (Hallsson, Siebner and Hulme, 2018). Fairness is related with decline in confidence and affecting the performance.Thus, the negative implication of fairness may negatively impact an individual in terms of its emotional burst out and unfair decision making that would further decline an individual performance and its level of confidence.

Test your knowledge

Choose the correct answers and click "Submit":

Take home messages

Being equal means having the same rights: to live, to be respected, to feel free, to express ones thoughts, to seek ones own way of feeling fulfilled. What does fairness not mean? It does not mean homologation, it does not mean the absence of differences. In this regard, the concept of fairness in many contexts gives way to the concept of equity, which aims to guarantee everyone the same opportunities, taking into account particularities and differences. Equality and fairness, in fact, are not synonymous concepts: the first focuses on the starting point, that is, rights and duties, the second arrives at a potential point of arrival considering the opportunities offered by enhancing differences (Barclay, Bashshur & Fortin, 2017).

Conclusion

In life, in work, in culture, in passions, in the way of being, it is diversity that appears as a fundamental value, as an enriching factor that we have learned to recognize over time. Using a paradox: the diversity of thoughts, attitudes, abilities, personal characteristics, tastes and even intellectual predispositions become the most evident demonstration of being all persons. They are the sign that the fairness for human beings lives in the free expression of their difference. When we are fair and are able to open up to confrontation with those who have characteristics or thoughts different from ours, when we are able to appreciate a new point of view and another way of being, we open ourselves to the joy of discovery and grow allowing us to see further, valuing the depth and uniqueness of each individual including ourselves.

References

Barclay, L. J., Bashshur, M. R., & Fortin, M. (2017). Motivated cognition and fairness: Insights, integration, and creating a path forward. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(6), 867–889. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000204

Barsky, A., Kaplan, S. A., & Beal, D. J. (2011). Just feelings? The role of affect in the formation of organizational fairness judgments. Journal of Management, 37(1), 248-279. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310376325

Blader, S. L., Wiesenfeld, B. M., Fortin, M., & Wheeler-Smith, S. L. (2013). Fairness lies in the heart of the beholder: How the social emotions of third parties influence reactions to injustice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121(1), 62–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.12.004

Chung, M., Jang, YH. & Edelson, S.A. The path from role clarity to job satisfaction: natural acting and the moderating impact of perceived fairness of compensation in services. Serv Bus 15, 77–102 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-020-00434-5

Farthing, A. M. (2011). Cognitions and emotions-testing the tenets of Fairness Theory. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/26214

Hallsson, B.G., Siebner, H.R. & Hulme, O.J., (2018). Fairness, fast and slow: A review of dual process models of fairness. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. 89. pp.49-60.

Hegtvedt, K. A., & Parris, C. L. (2014). Emotions in justice processes. In Handbook of the sociology of emotions: Volume II (pp. 103-125). Springer, Dordrecht.

Ismagilova, E., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Slade, E. (2020). Perceived helpfulness of eWOM: Emotions, fairness and rationality. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53, 101748. http://hdl.handle.net/10454/16841

Malc, D., Mumel, D., & Pisnik, A. (2016). Exploring price fairness perceptions and their influence on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3693-3697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.031

Malc, D., Selinšek, A., Dlačić, J., & Milfelner, B. (2021). Exploring the emotional side of price fairness perceptions and its consequences. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 34(1), 1931-1948. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2020.1860790

Marescaux, E., De Winne, S., & Rofcanin, Y. (2021). Co-worker reactions to i-deals through the lens of social comparison: The role of fairness and emotions. Human Relations, 74(3), 329-353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726719884103 Matta, F. K., Erol‐Korkmaz, H. T., Johnson, R. E., & Biçaksiz, P. (2014). Significant work events and counterproductive work behavior: The role of fairness, emotions, and emotion regulation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(7), 920-944. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1934

Mattila, A., Hanks, L., & Wang, C. (2014). Others service experiences: Emotions, perceived justice, and behavior. European Journal of Marketing, 48(3-4), 552–571. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-04-2012-0201

McAuliffe, K., Blake, P. R., Steinbeis, N., & Warneken, F. (2017). The developmental foundations of human fairness. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(2), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0042

Mullen, E. (2016). The reciprocal relationship between affect and perceptions of fairness. In Distributive and Procedural Justice (pp. 31-54). Routledge.

Radke, S., Schäfer, I. C., Müller, B. W., & de Bruijn, E. R. (2013). Do different fairness contexts and facial emotions motivate ‘irrational’social decision-making in major depression? An exploratory patient study. Psychiatry research, 210(2), 438-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2013.07.017

Rispens, S., & Demerouti, E. (2016). Conflict at work, negative emotions, and performance: A diary study. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 9(2), 103-119. https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12069

Stumpf, S., Strappelli, L., Ahmed, S., Nakao, Y., Naseer, A., Gamba, G.D., & Regoli, D. (2021). Design Methods for Artificial Intelligence Fairness and Transparency. IUI Workshops. https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/26592

Zheng, Y., Yang, Z., Jin, C., Qi, Y., & Liu, X. (2017). The influence of emotion on fairness-related decision making: A critical review of theories and evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 8,1592. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017

External links

Evolution of responses to (un)fairness
Experimental Economics and Experimental Game Theory (Article about Ultimatum Games)
"Moral behavior in animals" Frans de wall Ted talk about (You-tube)

Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Fairness and emotion

Contents

Overview

What is Fairness?

Concept of fairness:

Theoretical perspectives of fairness:

Fairness and decision making

Use of fairness and emotions in organizations:

What are emotions?

Theoretical perspectives of emotions

Below are categories of emotions.

What is the relationship between fairness and emotions?

Positive and negative implications of fairness

Positive implications

Negative implications

Take home messages

Conclusion

See also

References

External links