Coverage of ethics within the artificial intelligence and machine learning academic literature: The case of disabled people

被引：22
作者：
Lillywhite A. [1 ]
Wolbring G. [1 ]
机构：
[1] Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies, Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB
来源：
Assistive Technology | 2021年 / 33卷 / 03期
基金：
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词：
artificial intelligence; disabled people; ethics; machine learning; people with disabilities;
D O I：
10.1080/10400435.2019.1593259
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Disabled people are often the anticipated users of scientific and technological products and processes advanced and enabled by artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). Disabled people are also impacted by societal impacts of AI/ML. Many ethical issues are identified within AI/ML as fields and within individual applications of AI/ML. At the same time, problems have been identified in how ethics discourses engage with disabled people. The aim of our scoping review was to better understand to what extent and how the AI/ML focused academic literature engaged with the ethics of AI/ML in relation to disabled people. Of the n = 1659 abstracts engaging with AI/ML and ethics downloaded from Scopus (which includes all Medline articles) and the 70 databases of EBSCO ALL, we found 54 relevant abstracts using the term “patient” and 11 relevant abstracts mentioning terms linked to “impair*”, “disab*” and “deaf”. Our study suggests a gap in the literature that should be filled given the many AI/ML related ethical issues identified in the literature and their impact on disabled people. © 2019 RESNA.
引用
收藏
页码：129 / 135
页数：6
相关论文
共 80 条
  • [1] Abascal J., Azevedo L., Fundamentals of inclusive HCI design, pp. 3-9, (2007)
  • [2] Adams K., Encarnacao P., Rios-Rincon A.M., Cook A.M., Will artificial intelligence be a blessing or concern in assistive robots for play?, Journal of Human Growth and Development, 28, 2, pp. 213-218, (2018)
  • [3] Aliman N.M., Malevolent cyborgization, (2017)
  • [4] Anderson M., Anderson S.L., GenEth: A general ethical dilemma analyzer, Paper presented at the Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, (2014)
  • [5] Anderson S., Allen P., Peckham S., Goodwin N., Asking the right questions: Scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services, Health Research Policy and Systems, 6, 1, (2008)
  • [6] Andre Q., Carmon Z., Wertenbroch K., Crum A., Frank D., Goldstein W., Yang H., Consumer choice and autonomy in the age of artificial intelligence and big data, Customer Needs and Solutions, 5, 1-2, pp. 28-37, (2018)
  • [7] Arksey H., O'Malley L., Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8, 1, pp. 19-32, (2005)
  • [8] Asilomar AI principles principles developed in conjunction with the 2017 asilomar conference, (2017)
  • [9] Aycock J., Sullins J., Ethical proactive threat research, LNCS., 6054, pp. 231-239, (2010)
  • [10] Baxter P., Jack S., Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers, The Qualitative Report, 13, 4, pp. 544-559, (2008)
12345678