mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

ECHO: A Participatory Framework for Bias-Anchored AI Harm Anticipation

arXiv 2512.03068 ↗First posted 27 Nov 2025cs.CY cs.AIcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems increasingly shape consequential decisions, creating value but also potential harms for individuals, social groups, and society. This has prompted calls for proactive approaches that anticipate harms early in the AI lifecycle. Although prior research identifies AI biases as sources of harm, the associations between particular lifecycle biases and harms remain insufficiently understood. We introduce textttECHO, a systematic, context-sensitive, and participatory framework that anchors early harm anticipation in lifecycle biases and elicits their perceived associations with potential harms.textttECHO identifies domain-specific stakeholders, instantiates biases through vignettes, collects harm judgements from human participants and a large language model (LLM), and organises them into descriptive and inferential ethical matrices. Applied to disease diagnosis and hiring, textttECHO surfaced non-uniform, context-sensitive bias--harm patterns indicating which harms were perceived as plausible consequences of particular AI biases. The theoretical interpretability of these patterns and the inferential support for specific associations strengthen the plausibility of the mappings. By linking stakeholder-specific anticipated harms to lifecycle biases, textttECHO supports source-level harm anticipation and provides structured input to subsequent AI governance actions

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 90 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Nov 2025.

Builds on

19 of 90 references.

References · 19

  1. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
  2. 2019A Framework for Understanding Sources of Harm throughout the Machine Learning Life Cyclecited by 192
  3. 2019Mitigating Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: Evaluating Claims and Practicescited by 170
  4. 2022Sociotechnical Harms of Algorithmic Systems: Scoping a Taxonomy for Harm Reductioncited by 137
  5. 2020Preventing Repeated Real World AI Failures by Cataloging Incidents: The AI Incident Databasecited by 95
  6. 2019Problem Formulation and Fairnesscited by 85
  7. 2023Fast Model Debias with Machine Unlearningcited by 70
  8. 2024The Dark Side of AI Companionship: A Taxonomy of Harmful Algorithmic Behaviors in Human-AI Relationshipscited by 61
  9. 2024'Simulacrum of Stories': Examining Large Language Models as Qualitative Research Participantscited by 27
  10. 2023AHA!: Facilitating AI Impact Assessment by Generating Examples of Harmscited by 26
  11. 2024A Collaborative, Human-Centred Taxonomy of AI, Algorithmic, and Automation Harmscited by 19
  12. 2024Not My Voice! A Taxonomy of Ethical and Safety Harms of Speech Generatorscited by 18
7 more
  1. 2024The Pursuit of Fairness in Artificial Intelligence Models: A Surveycited by 13
  2. 2024OxonFair: A Flexible Toolkit for Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 12
  3. 2025AI Mismatches: Identifying Potential Algorithmic Harms Before AI Developmentcited by 10
  4. 2025RiskRAG: A Data-Driven Solution for Improved AI Model Risk Reportingcited by 9
  5. 2023Anticipating Impacts: Using Large-Scale Scenario Writing to Explore Diverse Implications of Generative AI in the News Environmentcited by 6
  6. 2024User Privacy Harms and Risks in Conversational AI: A Proposed Frameworkcited by 3
  7. 2024Rolling in the deep of cognitive and AI biasescited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.