Fairness Concerns in App Reviews: A Study on AI-based Mobile Apps
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Fairness is one of the socio-technical concerns that must be addressed in software systems. Considering the popularity of mobile software applications (apps) among a wide range of individuals worldwide, mobile apps with unfair behaviors and outcomes can affect a significant proportion of the global population, potentially more than any other type of software system. Users express a wide range of socio-technical concerns in mobile app reviews. This research aims to investigate fairness concerns raised in mobile app reviews. Our research focuses on AI-based mobile app reviews as the chance of unfair behaviors and outcomes in AI-based mobile apps may be higher than in non-AI-based apps. To this end, we first manually constructed a ground-truth dataset, including 1,132 fairness and 1,473 non-fairness reviews. Leveraging the ground-truth dataset, we developed and evaluated a set of machine learning and deep learning models that distinguish fairness reviews from non-fairness reviews. Our experiments show that our best-performing model can detect fairness reviews with a precision of 94%. We then applied the best-performing model on approximately 9.5M reviews collected from 108 AI-based apps and identified around 92K fairness reviews. Next, applying the K-means clustering technique to the 92K fairness reviews, followed by manual analysis, led to the identification of six distinct types of fairness concerns (e.g., 'receiving different quality of features and services in different platforms and devices' and 'lack of transparency and fairness in dealing with user-generated content'). Finally, the manual analysis of 2,248 app owners' responses to the fairness reviews identified six root causes (e.g., 'copyright issues') that app owners report to justify fairness concerns.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 35 of its 104 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jan 2024.
Builds on
35 of 104 references.
References · 35
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
- 2013Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Spacecited by 4,346
- 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,462
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
- 2018Universal Sentence Encodercited by 485
- 2020Fairness in Machine Learning: A Surveycited by 369
- 2018Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?cited by 262
- 2018A comparative study of fairness-enhancing interventions in machine learningcited by 208
- 2019A Framework for Understanding Sources of Harm throughout the Machine Learning Life Cyclecited by 192
23 more
- 2022Bias Mitigation for Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 125
- 2017Fairness Testing: Testing Software for Discriminationcited by 123
- 2021Bias in Machine Learning Software: Why? How? What to do?cited by 92
- 2021Assessing the Fairness of AI Systems: AI Practitioners' Processes, Challenges, and Needs for Supportcited by 61
- 2022Fairness Testing: A Comprehensive Survey and Analysis of Trendscited by 61
- 2022Algorithmic Fairness Datasets: the Story so Farcited by 51
- 2018A First Look at Deep Learning Apps on Smartphonescited by 47
- 2020A Survey on Deep Learning for Software Engineeringcited by 37
- 2018The Impact of Automated Parameter Optimization on Defect Prediction Modelscited by 36
- 2021Fairness in Information Access Systemscited by 27
- 2022Fairify: Fairness Verification of Neural Networkscited by 22
- 2016Tuning for Software Analytics: is it Really Necessary?cited by 18
- 2023Out of Context: Investigating the Bias and Fairness Concerns of "Artificial Intelligence as a Service"cited by 15
- 2020The Effectiveness of Supervised Machine Learning Algorithms in Predicting Software Refactoringcited by 9
- 2022Towards a Roadmap on Software Engineering for Responsible AIcited by 9
- 2022Where is Your App Frustrating Users?cited by 5
- 2022Finding the Needle in a Haystack: On the Automatic Identification of Accessibility User Reviewscited by 4
- 2022Accessible or Not? An Empirical Investigation of Android App Accessibilitycited by 3
- 2022On the Violation of Honesty in Mobile Apps: Automated Detection and Categoriescited by 3
- 2020Fake News Spreader Detection on Twitter using Character N-Grams. Notebook for PAN at CLEF 2020cited by 2
- 2022Supporting Developers in Addressing Human-centric Issues in Mobile Appscited by 2
- 2023A Study of Gender Discussions in Mobile Appscited by 2
- 2021Measuring Ethics in AI with AI: A Methodology and Dataset Constructioncited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2025Ethical Concerns of Generative AI and Mitigation Strategies: A Systematic Mapping Studycited by 1
- 2025What Users Value and Critique: Large-Scale Analysis of User Feedback on AI-Powered Mobile Appscited by 0
- 2025Understanding Practitioners Perspectives on Monitoring Machine Learning Systemscited by 0
- 2026Age Matters: Analyzing Age-Related Discussions in App Reviewscited by 0
- 2026Age Matters: Analyzing Age-Related Discussions in App Reviews29 Jan 2026
- 2025Understanding Practitioners Perspectives on Monitoring Machine Learning Systems20 Aug 2025
- 2025What Users Value and Critique: Large-Scale Analysis of User Feedback on AI-Powered Mobile Apps12 Jun 2025
- 2025Ethical Concerns of Generative AI and Mitigation Strategies: A Systematic Mapping Study8 Jan 2025