# Fairness Evaluation in Text Classification: Machine Learning Practitioner Perspectives of Individual and Group Fairness

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.00673 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.00673/

## Key facts

- Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 43 of its 70 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 1 Mar 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 43)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02413/) (2016)
- [WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.07421/) (2020)
- [Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.07524/) (2016)
- [A Reductions Approach to Fair Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.02453/) (2018)
- [Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scores](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1609.05807/) (2016)
- [The Woman Worked as a Babysitter: On Biases in Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.01326/) (2019)
- [Evaluation: from precision, recall and F-measure to ROC, informedness, markedness and correlation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.16061/) (2020)
- [Nuanced Metrics for Measuring Unintended Bias with Real Data for Text Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.04561/) (2019)
- [Bias in Bios: A Case Study of Semantic Representation Bias in a High-Stakes Setting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.09451/) (2019)
- [Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments: The State of the Art](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.09207/) (2017)
- [Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.05239/) (2018)
- [Evaluating Gender Bias in Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.00591/) (2019)
- [A comparative study of fairness-enhancing interventions in machine learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.04422/) (2018)
- [Reducing Gender Bias in Abusive Language Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.07231/) (2018)
- [Counterfactual Fairness in Text Classification through Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.10610/) (2018)
- [Aequitas: A Bias and Fairness Audit Toolkit](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.05577/) (2018)
- [UnQovering Stereotyping Biases via Underspecified Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.02428/) (2020)
- [Beyond Parity: Fairness Objectives for Collaborative Filtering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.08804/) (2017)
- [On Measures of Biases and Harms in NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.03362/) (2021)
- [Training individually fair ML models with Sensitive Subspace Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.00020/) (2019)
- [Fairness and Accountability Design Needs for Algorithmic Support in High-Stakes Public Sector Decision-Making](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.01029/) (2018)
- [Designing Toxic Content Classification for a Diversity of Perspectives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.04511/) (2021)
- [Assessing the Fairness of AI Systems: AI Practitioners' Processes, Challenges, and Needs for Support](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.05675/) (2021)
- [Post-processing for Individual Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.13796/) (2021)
- [Mathematical Notions vs. Human Perception of Fairness: A Descriptive Approach to Fairness for Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.04783/) (2019)
- [Two-Player Games for Efficient Non-Convex Constrained Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.06500/) (2018)
- [Two Simple Ways to Learn Individual Fairness Metrics from Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.11439/) (2020)
- [Metric Learning for Individual Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.00250/) (2019)
- [How Do Fairness Definitions Fare? Examining Public Attitudes Towards Algorithmic Definitions of Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.03654/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [Position: Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.09264/) (2024)
- [EARN Fairness: Explaining, Asking, Reviewing, and Negotiating Artificial Intelligence Fairness Metrics Among Stakeholders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.11442/) (2024)
- [Human-in-the-loop Fairness: Integrating Stakeholder Feedback to Incorporate Fairness Perspectives in Responsible AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08064/) (2023)
- [Data Ethics Emergency Drill: A Toolbox for Discussing Responsible AI for Industry Teams](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.10438/) (2024)
- [Individual Fairness Through Reweighting and Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.01711/) (2024)
- ["I think this is fair": Uncovering the Complexities of Stakeholder Decision-Making in AI Fairness Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.17956/) (2025)
- [What We Know about Responsible AI Practices in Industry: A Half Decade of Empirical Research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.10431/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Mitigating algorithmic bias is a critical task in the development and deployment of machine learning models. While several toolkits exist to aid machine learning practitioners in addressing fairness issues, little is known about the strategies practitioners employ to evaluate model fairness and what factors influence their assessment, particularly in the context of text classification. Two common approaches of evaluating the fairness of a model are group fairness and individual fairness. We run a study with Machine Learning practitioners (n=24) to understand the strategies used to evaluate models. Metrics presented to practitioners (group vs. individual fairness) impact which models they consider fair. Participants focused on risks associated with underpredicting/overpredicting and model sensitivity relative to identity token manipulations. We discover fairness assessment strategies involving personal experiences or how users form groups of identity tokens to test model fairness. We provide recommendations for interactive tools for evaluating fairness in text classification.