(Unfair) Norms in Fairness Research: A Meta-Analysis
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Algorithmic fairness has emerged as a critical concern in artificial intelligence (AI) research. However, the development of fair AI systems is not an objective process. Fairness is an inherently subjective concept, shaped by the values, experiences, and identities of those involved in research and development. To better understand the norms and values embedded in current fairness research, we conduct a meta-analysis of algorithmic fairness papers from two leading conferences on AI fairness and ethics, AIES and FAccT, covering a final sample of 139 papers over the period from 2018 to 2022. Our investigation reveals two concerning trends: first, a US-centric perspective dominates throughout fairness research; and second, fairness studies exhibit a widespread reliance on binary codifications of human identity (e.g., "Black/White", "male/female"). These findings highlight how current research often overlooks the complexities of identity and lived experiences, ultimately failing to represent diverse global contexts when defining algorithmic bias and fairness. We discuss the limitations of these research design choices and offer recommendations for fostering more inclusive and representative approaches to fairness in AI systems, urging a paradigm shift that embraces nuanced, global understandings of human identity and values.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 90 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2024.
Builds on
18 of 90 references.
References · 18
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
- 2022Power to the People? Opportunities and Challenges for Participatory AIcited by 137
- 2019On the Apparent Conflict Between Individual and Group Fairnesscited by 126
- 2021Re-imagining Algorithmic Fairness in India and Beyondcited by 102
- 2021Reduced, Reused and Recycled: The Life of a Dataset in Machine Learning Researchcited by 100
- 2021Fairness for Unobserved Characteristics: Insights from Technological Impacts on Queer Communitiescited by 40
- 2022The Forgotten Margins of AI Ethicscited by 30
- 2023WEIRD FAccTs: How Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic is FAccT?cited by 28
- 2021A Sociotechnical View of Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 24
- 2019Global AI Ethics: A Review of the Social Impacts and Ethical Implications of Artificial Intelligencecited by 21
- 2022"There Is Not Enough Information": On the Effects of Explanations on Perceptions of Informational Fairness and Trustworthiness in Automated Decision-Makingcited by 19
- 2020Extending the Machine Learning Abstraction Boundary: A Complex Systems Approach to Incorporate Societal Contextcited by 18
6 more
- 2022Four Years of FAccT: A Reflexive, Mixed-Methods Analysis of Research Contributions, Shortcomings, and Future Prospectscited by 14
- 2022Subverting machines, fluctuating identities: Re-learning human categorizationcited by 10
- 2023An Empirical Analysis of Racial Categories in the Algorithmic Fairness Literaturecited by 8
- 2022Fast online ranking with fairness of exposurecited by 5
- 2018Fast flow-based algorithm for creating density-equalizing map projectionscited by 2
- 2023Fairness Vs. Personalization: Towards Equity in Epistemic Utilitycited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.
1 paper.