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
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 50 条
  • [31] Algorithmic legitimacy in clinical decision-making
    Holm, Sune
    ETHICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, 2023, 25 (03)
  • [32] Algorithmic Decision-Making and the Control Problem
    John Zerilli
    Alistair Knott
    James Maclaurin
    Colin Gavaghan
    Minds and Machines, 2019, 29 : 555 - 578
  • [33] Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making
    Holm, Sune
    SYNTHESE, 2023, 202 (01)
  • [34] Algorithmic Decision-Making and the Control Problem
    Zerilli, John
    Knott, Alistair
    Maclaurin, James
    Gavaghan, Colin
    MINDS AND MACHINES, 2019, 29 (04) : 555 - 578
  • [35] Clinical decision-making and algorithmic inequality
    Challen, Robert
    Danon, Leon
    BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2023, 32 (09) : 495 - 497
  • [36] On the ethics of algorithmic decision-making in healthcare
    Grote, Thomas
    Berens, Philipp
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2020, 46 (03) : 205 - 211
  • [37] Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making
    Sune Holm
    Synthese, 202
  • [38] Algorithmic legitimacy in clinical decision-making
    Sune Holm
    Ethics and Information Technology, 2023, 25
  • [39] Gender discrimination in algorithmic decision-making
    Andreeva, Galina
    Matuszyk, Anna
    2ND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ADVANCED RESEARCH METHODS AND ANALYTICS (CARMA 2018), 2018, : 251 - 251
  • [40] Moral Decision-Making in Organizations
    Kouchaki, Maryam
    Smith, Isaac H.
    ANNUAL REVIEW OF ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY AND ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, 2025, 12 : 45 - 72