2000 character limit reached
Beyond Fairness: Alternative Moral Dimensions for Assessing Algorithms and Designing Systems (2312.12559v1)
Published 19 Dec 2023 in cs.CY and cs.HC
Abstract: The ethics of AI systems has risen as an imminent concern across scholarly communities. This concern has propagated a great interest in algorithmic fairness. Large research agendas are now devoted to increasing algorithmic fairness, assessing algorithmic fairness, and understanding human perceptions of fairness. We argue that there is an overreliance on fairness as a single dimension of morality, which comes at the expense of other important human values. Drawing from moral psychology, we present five moral dimensions that go beyond fairness, and suggest three ways these alternative dimensions may contribute to ethical AI development.
- Morality beyond the WEIRD: How the nomological network of morality varies across cultures. (2022).
- Life aspirations, values and moral foundations in Mongolian youth. Journal of Moral Education 46, 3 (2017), 258–271.
- Reuben Binns. 2018. Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. In Conference on fairness, accountability and transparency. PMLR, 149–159.
- Arunjana Das. 2022. Role of moral foundations in the nuclear disarmament of South Africa. Scientia Militaria: South African Journal of Military Studies 50, 1 (2022), 91–119.
- What Is Fairness. Fairness, Globalization, and Public Institutions (2006), 19.
- Virginia Dignum. 2019. Responsible artificial intelligence: how to develop and use AI in a responsible way. Vol. 2156. Springer.
- The five-factor model of the moral foundations theory is stable across WEIRD and non-WEIRD cultures. Personality and Individual Differences 151 (2019), 109547.
- Virginia Eubanks. 2018. Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin’s Press.
- A case for humans-in-the-loop: Decisions in the presence of misestimated algorithmic scores. Available at SSRN (2022).
- Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 47. Elsevier, 55–130.
- Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of personality and social psychology 96, 5 (2009), 1029.
- Mapping the moral domain. Journal of personality and social psychology 101, 2 (2011), 366.
- Matthew Grizzard and Changhyun Ahn. 2017. Morality & personality: perfect and deviant selves. Avatar, Assembled: The Social and Technical Anatomy of Digital Bodies. New York, NY: Peter Lang (2017).
- Jonathan Haidt. 2001. The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological review 108, 4 (2001), 814.
- Jonathan Haidt. 2012. The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Vintage.
- Jonathan Haidt and Jesse Graham. 2007. When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social justice research 20, 1 (2007), 98–116.
- Anna Lauren Hoffmann. 2019. Where fairness fails: data, algorithms, and the limits of antidiscrimination discourse. Information, Communication & Society 22, 7 (2019), 900–915.
- Designing for complementarity: Teacher and student needs for orchestration support in AI-enhanced classrooms. In Artificial Intelligence in Education: 20th International Conference, AIED 2019, Chicago, IL, USA, June 25-29, 2019, Proceedings, Part I 20. Springer, 157–171.
- David Hunter and Nicholas Evans. 2016. Facebook emotional contagion experiment controversy. , 2–3 pages.
- Improving human-AI partnerships in child welfare: understanding worker practices, challenges, and desires for algorithmic decision support. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.
- Inherent trade-offs in the fair determination of risk scores. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.05807 (2016).
- Why do we need Norm Sensitive Design? A WEIRD critique of value sensitive approaches to design. (2023).
- Development and validation of the Japanese moral foundations dictionary. PloS one 14, 3 (2019), e0213343.
- Patrizia Milesi and Augusta Isabella Alberici. 2018. Pluralistic morality and collective action: The role of moral foundations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 21, 2 (2018), 235–256.
- Algorithmic fairness: Choices, assumptions, and definitions. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application 8 (2021), 141–163.
- Rodrigo Ochigame. 2020. The Long History of Algorithmic Fairness. Phenomenal World (2020).
- Textual analysis of moral components in Islamic and Non-Islamic business in Russia. In 2021 International Conference on Sustainable Islamic Business and Finance. IEEE, 140–143.
- Iyad Rahwan. 2018. Society-in-the-loop: programming the algorithmic social contract. Ethics and information technology 20, 1 (2018), 5–14.
- Christopher Ranalli and Finlay Malcom. 2023. What’s so bad about echo chambers? Inquiry (2023), 1–43.
- Walter Renner. 2014. Globalization and Indian youth: Findings from moral foundations theory. In Current issues of science and research in the global world: Proceedings of the International Conference on Current Issues of Science and Research in the Global World, Vienna, Austria; 27. 7.
- Using moral foundations theory to enhance multicultural competency. Counseling and Values 63, 2 (2018), 180–193.
- Re-imagining algorithmic fairness in india and beyond. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 315–328.
- Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. In Proceedings of the conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 59–68.
- The “big three” of morality (autonomy, community, divinity) and the “big three” explanations of suffering. In Morality and health. Routledge, 119–169.
- Ignore, trust, or negotiate: understanding clinician acceptance of AI-based treatment recommendations in health care. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.
- How diversity matters in the US science and engineering workforce: A critical review considering integration in teams, fields, and organizational contexts. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 3 (2017), 139–153.
- Fairness perceptions of algorithmic decision-making: A systematic review of the empirical literature. Big Data & Society 9, 2 (2022), 20539517221115189.
- Jake B Telkamp and Marc H Anderson. 2022. The implications of diverse human moral foundations for assessing the ethicality of Artificial Intelligence. Journal of Business Ethics 178, 4 (2022), 961–976.
- There is an elephant in the room: Towards a critique on the use of fairness in biometrics. AI and Ethics (2022), 1–16.
- Justice and fairness. Issues in Ethics 3, 2 (1990), 1–3.
- Can Voice Assistants Be Microaggressors? Cross-Race Psychological Responses to Failures of Automatic Speech Recognition. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14.