Facial Recognition Technology Codes of Ethics: Content Analysis and Review

A. Roundtree
{"title":"Facial Recognition Technology Codes of Ethics: Content Analysis and Review","authors":"A. Roundtree","doi":"10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports insights from content and rhetorical analyses of codes of ethics (COEs) for designing facial recognition technology (FRT). The paper considers 16 new codes of ethics created for engineers to follow as they design FRT considering its social implications. It contributes to the literature by providing insights into what domains and dimensions emerge from codes of ethics specifically designed to encourage accountability in FRT design. We searched several research databases and conducted Google searches to identify FRT codes of ethics published between 2010 and 2020. The search yielded 16 lists of principles. Analysis revealed that FRT codes of ethics retain many domains typical of engineering codes of ethics, including professionalism and abiding by industry standards. However, the nature of FRT also required additional domains, including rights, consent, and accountability. Themes not only invoked characteristics necessary for engineers to follow but also expected FRT characteristics, such as transparency about errors and bias. FRT codes of ethics show what the industry expects of the actor-network created by FRT deployments and the engineers who design them. FRT codes of ethics are closed-system symbolic and persuasive processes that establish collective perceptions derived from prescriptions from leadership or professional organizations.","PeriodicalId":286504,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)","volume":"119 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper reports insights from content and rhetorical analyses of codes of ethics (COEs) for designing facial recognition technology (FRT). The paper considers 16 new codes of ethics created for engineers to follow as they design FRT considering its social implications. It contributes to the literature by providing insights into what domains and dimensions emerge from codes of ethics specifically designed to encourage accountability in FRT design. We searched several research databases and conducted Google searches to identify FRT codes of ethics published between 2010 and 2020. The search yielded 16 lists of principles. Analysis revealed that FRT codes of ethics retain many domains typical of engineering codes of ethics, including professionalism and abiding by industry standards. However, the nature of FRT also required additional domains, including rights, consent, and accountability. Themes not only invoked characteristics necessary for engineers to follow but also expected FRT characteristics, such as transparency about errors and bias. FRT codes of ethics show what the industry expects of the actor-network created by FRT deployments and the engineers who design them. FRT codes of ethics are closed-system symbolic and persuasive processes that establish collective perceptions derived from prescriptions from leadership or professional organizations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人脸识别技术伦理规范:内容分析与回顾
本文从设计面部识别技术(FRT)的道德规范(COEs)的内容和修辞分析中获得见解。这篇论文考虑了16条新的道德准则,这些准则是为工程师在设计FRT时考虑到其社会影响而制定的。它通过提供对专门设计用于鼓励FRT设计中的问责制的道德准则所产生的领域和维度的见解,对文献做出了贡献。我们检索了几个研究数据库,并进行了谷歌搜索,以确定2010年至2020年间发布的FRT道德规范。搜索产生了16个原则列表。分析表明,FRT道德规范保留了许多工程道德规范的典型领域,包括专业精神和遵守行业标准。然而,FRT的性质还需要其他领域,包括权利、同意和问责制。主题不仅调用了工程师必须遵循的特征,而且还调用了期望的FRT特征,例如对错误和偏差的透明度。FRT道德规范显示了业界对FRT部署和设计它们的工程师所创建的行动者网络的期望。FRT道德准则是封闭系统的象征性和说服过程,它建立了来自领导或专业组织的处方的集体观念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Development of Technical Communication in China: Program Building and Industrial Trends Teaching Engineering Writing through Rhetorical Genre Studies UX Methods as Transformative Institutional Change: Stacey Abrams’ Georgia Campaign as a Formative Example (Un)housed and (Un)heard: The Power of Narrative in Reimagining Long-Term Crisis Communication Extended Abstract: NSF Merit Review Criteria as Points of Entry for Advancing Social Justice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1