Informed consent and algorithmic discrimination – is giving away your data the new vulnerable?

IF 1.6 Q2 ECONOMICS REVIEW OF SOCIAL ECONOMY Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/00346764.2022.2027506
Hauke Behrendt, Wulf Loh
{"title":"Informed consent and algorithmic discrimination – is giving away your data the new vulnerable?","authors":"Hauke Behrendt, Wulf Loh","doi":"10.1080/00346764.2022.2027506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses various forms and sources of algorithmic discrimination. In particular, we explore the connection between – at first glance – ‘voluntary’ sharing or selling of one’s data on the one hand and potential risks of automated decision-making based on big data and artificial intelligence on the other. We argue that the implementation of algorithm-driven profiling or decision-making mechanisms will, in many cases, disproportionately disadvantage certain vulnerable groups that are already disadvantaged by many existing datafication practices. We call into question the voluntariness of these mechanisms, especially for certain vulnerable groups, and claim that members of such groups are oftentimes more likely to give away their data. If these existing datafication practices exacerbate prior disadvantages, they ‘compound historical injustices’ (Hellman, 2018) and thereby constitute forms of morally wrong discrimination. To make matters worse, they are even more prone to further algorithmic discriminations based on the additional data collected from them.","PeriodicalId":46636,"journal":{"name":"REVIEW OF SOCIAL ECONOMY","volume":"80 1","pages":"58 - 84"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"REVIEW OF SOCIAL ECONOMY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00346764.2022.2027506","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper discusses various forms and sources of algorithmic discrimination. In particular, we explore the connection between – at first glance – ‘voluntary’ sharing or selling of one’s data on the one hand and potential risks of automated decision-making based on big data and artificial intelligence on the other. We argue that the implementation of algorithm-driven profiling or decision-making mechanisms will, in many cases, disproportionately disadvantage certain vulnerable groups that are already disadvantaged by many existing datafication practices. We call into question the voluntariness of these mechanisms, especially for certain vulnerable groups, and claim that members of such groups are oftentimes more likely to give away their data. If these existing datafication practices exacerbate prior disadvantages, they ‘compound historical injustices’ (Hellman, 2018) and thereby constitute forms of morally wrong discrimination. To make matters worse, they are even more prone to further algorithmic discriminations based on the additional data collected from them.
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
知情同意和算法歧视——泄露你的数据是新的弱点吗?
本文讨论了算法歧视的各种形式和来源。我们特别探讨了乍一看“自愿”分享或出售个人数据与基于大数据和人工智能的自动决策的潜在风险之间的联系。我们认为,在许多情况下,算法驱动的分析或决策机制的实施将不成比例地使某些弱势群体处于不利地位,这些群体已经在许多现有的数据实践中处于不利地位。我们对这些机制的自愿性提出质疑,特别是对某些弱势群体,并声称这些群体的成员通常更有可能泄露他们的数据。如果这些现有的数据化做法加剧了先前的劣势,它们就“加剧了历史的不公正”(Hellman, 2018),从而构成了道德上错误的歧视形式。更糟糕的是,基于从他们身上收集到的额外数据,他们甚至更容易受到进一步的算法歧视。
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
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: For over sixty-five years, the Review of Social Economy has published high-quality peer-reviewed work on the many relationships between social values and economics. The field of social economics discusses how the economy and social justice relate, and what this implies for economic theory and policy. Papers published range from conceptual work on aligning economic institutions and policies with given ethical principles, to theoretical representations of individual behaviour that allow for both self-interested and "pro-social" motives, and to original empirical work on persistent social issues such as poverty, inequality, and discrimination.
期刊最新文献
Detaching ‘neoliberalism’ from ‘free markets’: monopolistic corporations as neoliberalism’s ideal market form A political economy analysis of changes and continuities in Iran–Africa trade relations: a case of South–South dependency? Financialization and the social economy The rise and fall of Britain’s Golden Cohort: how the remarkable generation of 1925–1934 had their lives cut short by austerity The understructure of market production
×
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