This paper presents a work-in-progress conceptual framework that bridges Computer Science approaches to formal algorithmic fairness with normative and Social Science fairness approaches regarding perceived fairness, trust, and technology acceptance, embedding both within the sociotechnical conditions that shape human judgment.
Abstract
While fairness has become a central concern in research on algorithmic systems, the field remains predominantly shaped by Computer Science, resulting in a strong emphasis on formal fairness metrics and bias mitigation strategies. Nevertheless, this focus may obscure a fundamental challenge: fairness is not merely a technical property, but a subjective, context-sensitive human judgment shaped by cognitive heuristics, mental models, normative expectations, and sociotechnical factors. Crucially, users'perceptions of fairness may diverge substantially from the fairness criteria an algorithm formally satisfies; a system may meet predefined technical fairness requirements yet still be perceived as unjust by decision-affected stakeholders. In such cases, the system fails on a fundamental dimension: it will not be trusted, accepted, or considered legitimate. Taking a user-centered design perspective, this paper presents a work-in-progress conceptual framework that bridges Computer Science approaches to formal algorithmic fairness with normative and Social Science fairness approaches regarding perceived fairness, trust, and technology acceptance, embedding both within the sociotechnical conditions that shape human judgment. Through (1) theoretical literature synthesis, (2) interdisciplinary workshops, and (3) stakeholder interviews, the project aims to inform evaluation approaches that integrate computational fairness audits with user-centered assessments and guide the design of fairness-aware, human-centered algorithmic systems that support informed, well-calibrated fairness judgments by those affected.
This study introduces a fairness-by-design framework that integrates stakeholder involvement and explainability into the development lifecycle and operationalizes this framework through the Fairness Process Card, a practical tool for documenting procedural justice mechanisms.
This article proposes that algorithmic fairness is best understood as a human-technology interaction problem rather than a purely technical challenge, and offers an interdisciplinary perspective that integrates insights from social justice, psychology, computer science, judgment and decision-making, and management.
A. Lemmens· Current Opinion in Psycholog...· 0 citations
This position paper argues that fairness failures in generative models, albeit driven by multiple factors, are ultimately stemming from an evaluation problem: fairness findings are rarely comparable across papers or actionable for deployment decisions.
M. Vladimirova, Jean-Yves Franceschi, Thibaut Issenhuth· 0 citations
This study explores the potential of counterfactual explanations to assess artificial intelligence (AI) fairness, especially in critical decision-making systems. Predictive models may amplify biases inherent in data sets or algorithms, and given the absence of a universally accepted fairness metric, a case-specific app...
Federico Sabbatini, Roberta Calegari· AI and Ethics· 0 citations
Fairness is increasingly recognised as a first-class requirement in socio-technical processes, where interactions among human actors, software systems, and AI technologies may lead to unfair outcomes in decision-making workflows. If left unaddressed, fairness hazards may accumulate and reinforce systemic bias, highligh...
Giovanna Broccia, L. Lelii, Roberto Cirillo et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.