How Counterfactual Fairness Modelling in Algorithms Can Promote Ethical Decision-Making

被引:1
|
作者
De Schutter, Leander [1 ]
De Cremer, David [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus Univ, Rotterdam Sch Management, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Natl Univ Singapore, Ctr AI Technol Humankind, NUS Business Sch, Singapore, Singapore
[3] Northeastern Univ, DAmore McKim Sch Business, Boston, MA USA
关键词
ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE; UNREALISTIC OPTIMISM; MIND-SETS; BIG DATA; MANAGEMENT; PRIMES;
D O I
10.1080/10447318.2023.2247624
中图分类号
TP3 [计算技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Organizational decision-makers often need to make difficult decisions. One popular way today is to improve those decisions by using information and recommendations provided by data-driven algorithms (i.e., AI advisors). Advice is especially important when decisions involve conflicts of interests, such as ethical dilemmas. A defining characteristic of ethical decision-making is that it often involves a thought process of exploring and imagining what would, could, and should happen under alternative conditions (i.e., what-if scenarios). Such imaginative "counterfactual thinking," however, is not explored by AI advisors - unless they are pre-programmed to do so. Drawing on Fairness Theory, we identify key counterfactual scenarios programmers can incorporate in the code of AI advisors to improve fairness perceptions. We conducted an experimental study to test our predictions, and the results showed that explanations that include counterfactual scenarios were perceived as fairer by recipients. Taken together, we believe that counterfactual modelling will improve ethical decision-making by actively modelling what-if scenarios valued by recipients. We further discuss benefits of counterfactual modelling, such as inspiring decision-makers to engage in counterfactual thinking within their own decision-making process.
引用
收藏
页码:33 / 44
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Contrastive Counterfactual Fairness in Algorithmic Decision-Making
    Mutlu, Ece Cigdem
    Yousefi, Niloofar
    Garibay, Ozlem Ozmen
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2022 AAAI/ACM CONFERENCE ON AI, ETHICS, AND SOCIETY, AIES 2022, 2022, : 499 - 507
  • [2] Fairness, feelings, and ethical decision-making: Consequences of violating community standards of fairness
    Schweitzer, Maurice E.
    Gibson, Donald E.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2008, 77 (03) : 287 - 301
  • [3] Algorithms for Ethical Decision-Making in the Clinic: A Proof of Concept
    Meier, Lukas J.
    Hein, Alice
    Diepold, Klaus
    Buyx, Alena
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2022, 22 (07): : 4 - 20
  • [4] Ethical decision-making interrupted: Can cognitive tools improve decision-making following an interruption?
    Stenmark, Cheryl
    Riley, Katherine
    Kreitler, Crystal
    [J]. ETHICS & BEHAVIOR, 2020, 30 (08) : 557 - 580
  • [5] Researching in the Open: How a Networked Learning Instance can Challenge Ethical Decision-Making
    Esposito, Antonella
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE 10TH EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON E-LEARNING, VOLS 1 AND 2, 2011, : 218 - 224
  • [6] Fairness and algorithmic decision-making
    Giovanola, Benedetta
    Tiribelli, Simona
    [J]. TEORIA-RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA, 2022, 42 (02): : 117 - 129
  • [7] How to Use AI Ethically for Ethical Decision-Making
    Demaree-Cotton, Joanna
    Earp, Brian D.
    Savulescu, Julian
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2022, 22 (07): : 1 - 3
  • [8] ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING
    TOFFLER, BL
    [J]. FORTUNE, 1987, 115 (03) : 15 - 15
  • [9] HOW A CONSORTIUM CAN HELP IN DECISION-MAKING
    WILHELM, S
    [J]. JOURNAL OF COLLEGE STUDENT DEVELOPMENT, 1978, 19 (06) : 573 - 574
  • [10] Algorithms for Fairness in Sequential Decision Making
    Wen, Min
    Bastani, Osbert
    Topcu, Ufuk
    [J]. 24TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND STATISTICS (AISTATS), 2021, 130