首页> 外文期刊>Computer law & security report >Who is the fairest of them all? Public attitudes and expectations regarding automated decision-making
【24h】

Who is the fairest of them all? Public attitudes and expectations regarding automated decision-making

机译:谁是最公平的全部?关于自动决策的公众态度和期望

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The ongoing substitution of human decision makers by automated decision-making (ADM) systems in a whole range of areas raises the question of whether and, if so, under which conditions ADM is acceptable and fair. So far, this debate has been primarily led by aca-demics, civil society, technology developers and members of the expert groups tasked to develop ethical guidelines for ADM. Ultimately, however, ADM affects citizens, who will live with, act upon and ultimately have to accept the authority of ADM systems.The paper aims to contribute to this larger debate by providing deeper insights into the question of whether, and if so, why and under which conditions, citizens are inclined to accept ADM as fair. The results of a survey (N = 958) with a representative sample of the Dutch adult population, show that most respondents assume that AI-driven ADM systems are fairer than human decision-makers.A more nuanced view emerges from an analysis of the responses, with emotions, expectations about AI being data-and calculation-driven, as well as the role of the programmer among other dimensions-being cited as reasons for (un)fairness by AI or humans. Individual characteristics such as age and education level influenced not only perceptions about AI fairness, but also the reasons provided for such perceptions. The paper concludes with a normative assessment of the findings and suggestions for the future debate and research. (C) 2020 Natali Helberger, Theo Araujo, Claes H. de Vreese. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:在整个领域的自动决策(ADM)系统通过自动决策(ADM)系统持续替代人类决策者提出了无论是否有条件的条件是可接受的和公平的问题。到目前为止,这场辩论主要由ACA-博士,民间社会,技术开发商和专家组成员领导,该专家组任务是制定ADM的道德准则。然而,最终,ADM会影响居住的公民,诉诸,并最终承担ADM系统的权威。本文旨在通过向该问题提供更深入的洞察力来促进这一更大的辩论。为什么在哪些条件下,公民倾向于接受ADM作为公平。调查结果(n = 958)与荷兰成年人口的代表性样本,表明,大多数受访者认为AI驱动的ADM系统比人类决策者更公平。从对答复的分析中出现了更细微的观点在情绪中,关于AI的期望是数据和计算驱动的,以及程序员在其他方面的作用 - 被引用为(UN)通过AI或人类公平的原因。年龄和教育程度等个人特征不仅影响了对AI公平性的看法,而且影响了这种看法提供的原因。本文的结论是对未来辩论和研究的调查结果和建议的规范评估。 (c)2020 Natali Helberger,Theo Araujo,Claes H. de Vreeses。 elsevier有限公司出版。保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号