Studying Up Machine Learning Data: Why Talk About Bias When We Mean Power?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Research in machine learning (ML) has primarily argued that models trained on incomplete or biased datasets can lead to discriminatory outputs. In this commentary, we propose moving the research focus beyond bias-oriented framings by adopting a power-aware perspective to "study up" ML datasets. This means accounting for historical inequities, labor conditions, and epistemological standpoints inscribed in data. We draw on HCI and CSCW work to support our argument, critically analyze previous research, and point at two co-existing lines of work within our community -- one bias-oriented, the other power-aware. This way, we highlight the need for dialogue and cooperation in three areas: data quality, data work, and data documentation. In the first area, we argue that reducing societal problems to "bias" misses the context-based nature of data. In the second one, we highlight the corporate forces and market imperatives involved in the labor of data workers that subsequently shape ML datasets. Finally, we propose expanding current transparency-oriented efforts in dataset documentation to reflect the social contexts of data design and production.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 100 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2021.
Builds on
19 of 100 references.
References · 19
- 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,371
- 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,068
- 2020Data and its (dis)contents: A survey of dataset development and use in machine learning researchcited by 259
- 2019Are We Modeling the Task or the Annotator? An Investigation of Annotator Bias in Natural Language Understanding Datasetscited by 173
- 2021The Values Encoded in Machine Learning Researchcited by 172
- 2019Towards a Critical Race Methodology in Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 124
- 2018The Dataset Nutrition Label: A Framework To Drive Higher Data Quality Standardscited by 97
- 2019Problem Formulation and Fairnesscited by 85
- 2020How do Data Science Workers Collaborate? Roles, Workflows, and Toolscited by 64
- 2020Bringing the People Back In: Contesting Benchmark Machine Learning Datasetscited by 43
- 2017A Data-Driven Analysis of Workers' Earnings on Amazon Mechanical Turkcited by 38
- 2020Between Subjectivity and Imposition: Power Dynamics in Data Annotation for Computer Visioncited by 25
7 more
- 2017Quantifying Search Bias: Investigating Sources of Bias for Political Searches in Social Mediacited by 18
- 2018Data Science as Political Action: Grounding Data Science in a Politics of Justicecited by 14
- 2020Data Vision: Learning to See Through Algorithmic Abstractioncited by 11
- 2020Measuring Social Biases of Crowd Workers using Counterfactual Queriescited by 6
- 2018AI for the Common Good?! Pitfalls, challenges, and Ethics Pen-Testingcited by 4
- 2020The Future of Work Is Here: Toward a Comprehensive Approach to Artificial Intelligence and Labourcited by 3
- 2021Wisdom for the Crowd: Discoursive Power in Annotation Instructions for Computer Visioncited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 2; 2024: 4; 2025: 1; 2026: 3.
11 papers.
- 2022Exploring How Machine Learning Practitioners (Try To) Use Fairness Toolkitscited by 33
- 2024The Human Factor in AI Red Teaming: Perspectives from Social and Collaborative Computingcited by 8
- 2025In the Picture: Medical Imaging Datasets, Artifacts, and their Living Reviewcited by 8
- 2024Studying Up Public Sector AI: How Networks of Power Relations Shape Agency Decisions Around AI Design and Usecited by 6
- 2023The Ethics of AI Value Chainscited by 3
- 2023Making Data Work Countcited by 2
- 2024The Cadaver in the Machine: The Social Practices of Measurement and Validation in Motion Capture Technologycited by 1
- 2026Strategic Polysemy in AI Discourse: A Philosophical Analysis of Language, Hype, and Powercited by 1
- 2024Gender Bias Detection in Court Decisions: A Brazilian Case Studycited by 0
- 2026Red Teaming LLMs as Socio-Technical Practice: From Exploration and Data Creation to Evaluationcited by 0
- 2026Relative Principals, Pluralistic Alignment, and the Structural Value Alignment Problemcited by 0
- 2026Strategic Polysemy in AI Discourse: A Philosophical Analysis of Language, Hype, and Power22 Apr 2026
- 2026Relative Principals, Pluralistic Alignment, and the Structural Value Alignment Problem22 Apr 2026
- 2026Red Teaming LLMs as Socio-Technical Practice: From Exploration and Data Creation to Evaluation10 Feb 2026
- 2025In the Picture: Medical Imaging Datasets, Artifacts, and their Living Review18 Jan 2025
- 2024The Human Factor in AI Red Teaming: Perspectives from Social and Collaborative Computing10 Jul 2024
- 2024Gender Bias Detection in Court Decisions: A Brazilian Case Study1 Jun 2024
- 2024Studying Up Public Sector AI: How Networks of Power Relations Shape Agency Decisions Around AI Design and Use21 May 2024
- 2024The Cadaver in the Machine: The Social Practices of Measurement and Validation in Motion Capture Technology19 Jan 2024
- 2023Making Data Work Count29 Nov 2023
- 2023The Ethics of AI Value Chains31 Jul 2023
- 2022Exploring How Machine Learning Practitioners (Try To) Use Fairness Toolkits13 May 2022