Weapons of moral construction? On the value of fairness in algorithmic decision-making

被引:0
作者
Benedetta Giovanola
Simona Tiribelli
机构
[1] University of Macerata,Department of Political Sciences, Communication, and International Relations
[2] Tufts University,Department of Philosophy
[3] Institute for Technology and Global Health,undefined
[4] PathCheck Foundation,undefined
来源
Ethics and Information Technology | 2022年 / 24卷
关键词
Fairness; Algorithmic decision-making; Machine learning; Discrimination; Respect; Ethics of algorithms;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Fairness is one of the most prominent values in the Ethics and Artificial Intelligence (AI) debate and, specifically, in the discussion on algorithmic decision-making (ADM). However, while the need for fairness in ADM is widely acknowledged, the very concept of fairness has not been sufficiently explored so far. Our paper aims to fill this gap and claims that an ethically informed re-definition of fairness is needed to adequately investigate fairness in ADM. To achieve our goal, after an introductory section aimed at clarifying the aim and structure of the paper, in section “Fairness in algorithmic decision-making” we provide an overview of the state of the art of the discussion on fairness in ADM and show its shortcomings; in section “Fairness as an ethical value”, we pursue an ethical inquiry into the concept of fairness, drawing insights from accounts of fairness developed in moral philosophy, and define fairness as an ethical value. In particular, we argue that fairness is articulated in a distributive and socio-relational dimension; it comprises three main components: fair equality of opportunity, equal right to justification, and fair equality of relationship; these components are grounded in the need to respect persons both as persons and as particular individuals. In section “Fairness in algorithmic decision-making revised”, we analyze the implications of our redefinition of fairness as an ethical value on the discussion of fairness in ADM and show that each component of fairness has profound effects on the criteria that ADM ought to meet. Finally, in section “Concluding remarks”, we sketch some broader implications and conclude.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 78 条
[1]  
Ananny M(2018)Seeing without Knowing: Limitations of the transparency ideal and its application to algorithmic accountability New Media & Society 20 973-989
[2]  
Crawford K(1999)What is the point of equality? Ethics 109 289-337
[3]  
Anderson E(2016)Big data’s disparate impact SSRN Electronic Journal 2 100205-679
[4]  
Barocas S(2018)Fairness in criminal justice risk assessments: The state of the art Sociological Methods & Research 15 662-227
[5]  
Selbst AD(2021)Algorithmic injustice: A relational ethics approach Patterns 15 209-641
[6]  
Berk R(2012)CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR BIG DATA Information, Communication & Society 119 613-571
[7]  
Heidari H(2013)Bias in algorithmic filtering and personalization Ethics and Information Technology 121 538-220
[8]  
Jabbari S(2019)Managing algorithmic accountability: balancing reputational concerns, engagement strategies, and the potential of rational discourse’ Journal of Business Ethics 13 201-49
[9]  
Kearns M(2009)What good is commitment? Ethics 88 36-828
[10]  
Roth A(2011)Respect and the basis of equality Ethics 5 809-696