欧洲投票建议应用程序的可信度。

IF 3.4 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Ethics and Information Technology Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-12 DOI:10.1007/s10676-024-09790-6
Elisabeth Stockinger, Jonne Maas, Christofer Talvitie, Virginia Dignum
{"title":"欧洲投票建议应用程序的可信度。","authors":"Elisabeth Stockinger, Jonne Maas, Christofer Talvitie, Virginia Dignum","doi":"10.1007/s10676-024-09790-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) are interactive tools used to assist in one's choice of a party or candidate to vote for in an upcoming election. They have the potential to increase citizens' trust and participation in democratic structures. However, there is no established ground truth for one's electoral choice, and VAA recommendations depend strongly on architectural and design choices. We assessed several representative European VAAs according to the Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI provided by the European Commission using publicly available information. We found scores to be comparable across VAAs and low in most requirements, with differences reflecting the kind of developing institution. Across VAAs, we identify the need for improvement in (i) transparency regarding the subjectivity of recommendations, (ii) diversity of stakeholder participation, (iii) user-centric documentation of algorithm, and (iv) disclosure of the underlying values and assumptions.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10676-024-09790-6.</p>","PeriodicalId":51495,"journal":{"name":"Ethics and Information Technology","volume":"26 3","pages":"55"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11415416/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trustworthiness of voting advice applications in Europe.\",\"authors\":\"Elisabeth Stockinger, Jonne Maas, Christofer Talvitie, Virginia Dignum\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10676-024-09790-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) are interactive tools used to assist in one's choice of a party or candidate to vote for in an upcoming election. They have the potential to increase citizens' trust and participation in democratic structures. However, there is no established ground truth for one's electoral choice, and VAA recommendations depend strongly on architectural and design choices. We assessed several representative European VAAs according to the Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI provided by the European Commission using publicly available information. We found scores to be comparable across VAAs and low in most requirements, with differences reflecting the kind of developing institution. Across VAAs, we identify the need for improvement in (i) transparency regarding the subjectivity of recommendations, (ii) diversity of stakeholder participation, (iii) user-centric documentation of algorithm, and (iv) disclosure of the underlying values and assumptions.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10676-024-09790-6.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51495,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics and Information Technology\",\"volume\":\"26 3\",\"pages\":\"55\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11415416/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics and Information Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09790-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics and Information Technology","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09790-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

投票咨询应用程序(VAAs)是一种互动工具,用于帮助人们在即将举行的选举中选择党派或候选人。它们有可能增加公民对民主结构的信任和参与。然而,一个人的选举选择并没有既定的基本事实,VAA 的建议在很大程度上取决于架构和设计选择。我们根据欧盟委员会提供的《可信人工智能道德准则》,利用公开信息评估了几个具有代表性的欧洲 VAA。我们发现各 VAA 的得分不相上下,大多数要求的得分较低,差异反映了发展中机构的类型。在所有 VAA 中,我们发现在以下方面需要改进:(i) 建议主观性的透明度;(ii) 利益相关者参与的多样性;(iii) 以用户为中心的算法文档;(iv) 基本价值观和假设的披露:在线版本包含补充材料,可查阅 10.1007/s10676-024-09790-6。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Trustworthiness of voting advice applications in Europe.

Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) are interactive tools used to assist in one's choice of a party or candidate to vote for in an upcoming election. They have the potential to increase citizens' trust and participation in democratic structures. However, there is no established ground truth for one's electoral choice, and VAA recommendations depend strongly on architectural and design choices. We assessed several representative European VAAs according to the Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI provided by the European Commission using publicly available information. We found scores to be comparable across VAAs and low in most requirements, with differences reflecting the kind of developing institution. Across VAAs, we identify the need for improvement in (i) transparency regarding the subjectivity of recommendations, (ii) diversity of stakeholder participation, (iii) user-centric documentation of algorithm, and (iv) disclosure of the underlying values and assumptions.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10676-024-09790-6.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Ethics and Information Technology is a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to advancing the dialogue between moral philosophy and the field of information and communication technology (ICT). The journal aims to foster and promote reflection and analysis which is intended to make a constructive contribution to answering the ethical, social and political questions associated with the adoption, use, and development of ICT. Within the scope of the journal are also conceptual analysis and discussion of ethical ICT issues which arise in the context of technology assessment, cultural studies, public policy analysis and public administration, cognitive science, social and anthropological studies in technology, mass-communication, and legal studies.
期刊最新文献
Engineers on responsibility: feminist approaches to who’s responsible for ethical AI AI and the need for justification (to the patient). Trustworthiness of voting advice applications in Europe. Large language models and their big bullshit potential. How to teach responsible AI in Higher Education: challenges and opportunities
×
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