Multi-stakeholder Perspective on Responsible Artificial Intelligence and Acceptability in Education

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.15027v2
• Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:21:52 GMT
• Title: Multi-stakeholder Perspective on Responsible Artificial Intelligence and Acceptability in Education
• Authors: A.J. Karran, P. Charland, J-T. Martineau, A. Ortiz de Guinea Lopez de Arana, AM. Lesage, S. Senecal, P-M. Leger
• Abstract summary: The study investigates the acceptability of different AI applications in education from a multi-stakeholder perspective. It addresses concerns related to data privacy, AI agency, transparency, explainability and the ethical deployment of AI.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: This study investigates the acceptability of different artificial intelligence (AI) applications in education from a multi-stakeholder perspective, including students, teachers, and parents. Acknowledging the transformative potential of AI in education, it addresses concerns related to data privacy, AI agency, transparency, explainability and the ethical deployment of AI. Through a vignette methodology, participants were presented with four scenarios where AI's agency, transparency, explainability, and privacy were manipulated. After each scenario, participants completed a survey that captured their perceptions of AI's global utility, individual usefulness, justice, confidence, risk, and intention to use each scenario's AI if available. The data collection comprising a final sample of 1198 multi-stakeholder participants was distributed through a partner institution and social media campaigns and focused on individual responses to four AI use cases. A mediation analysis of the data indicated that acceptance and trust in AI varies significantly across stakeholder groups. We found that the key mediators between high and low levels of AI's agency, transparency, and explainability, as well as the intention to use the different educational AI, included perceived global utility, justice, and confidence. The study highlights that the acceptance of AI in education is a nuanced and multifaceted issue that requires careful consideration of specific AI applications and their characteristics, in addition to the diverse stakeholders' perceptions.

Related papers

• Trustworthy and Responsible AI for Human-Centric Autonomous Decision-Making Systems [2.444630714797783]
  We review and discuss the intricacies of AI biases, definitions, methods of detection and mitigation, and metrics for evaluating bias. We also discuss open challenges with regard to the trustworthiness and widespread application of AI across diverse domains of human-centric decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T06:04:25Z)
• The Rise of Artificial Intelligence in Educational Measurement: Opportunities and Ethical Challenges [2.569083526579529]
  AI in education raises ethical concerns regarding validity, reliability, transparency, fairness, and equity. Various stakeholders, including educators, policymakers, and organizations, have developed guidelines to ensure ethical AI use in education. In this paper, a diverse group of AIME members examines the ethical implications of AI-powered tools in educational measurement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T05:28:40Z)
• Testing autonomous vehicles and AI: perspectives and challenges from cybersecurity, transparency, robustness and fairness [53.91018508439669]
  The study explores the complexities of integrating Artificial Intelligence into Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) It examines the challenges introduced by AI components and the impact on testing procedures. The paper identifies significant challenges and suggests future directions for research and development of AI in AV technology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T08:29:42Z)
• Training Towards Critical Use: Learning to Situate AI Predictions Relative to Human Knowledge [22.21959942886099]
  We introduce a process-oriented notion of appropriate reliance called critical use that centers the human's ability to situate AI predictions against knowledge that is uniquely available to them but unavailable to the AI model. We conduct a randomized online experiment in a complex social decision-making setting: child maltreatment screening. We find that, by providing participants with accelerated, low-stakes opportunities to practice AI-assisted decision-making, novices came to exhibit patterns of disagreement with AI that resemble those of experienced workers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-30T01:54:31Z)
• MAILS -- Meta AI Literacy Scale: Development and Testing of an AI Literacy Questionnaire Based on Well-Founded Competency Models and Psychological Change- and Meta-Competencies [6.368014180870025]
  The questionnaire should be modular (i.e., including different facets that can be used independently of each other) to be flexibly applicable in professional life. We derived 60 items to represent different facets of AI Literacy according to Ng and colleagues conceptualisation of AI literacy. Additional 12 items to represent psychological competencies such as problem solving, learning, and emotion regulation in regard to AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-18T12:35:55Z)
• Human-Centric Multimodal Machine Learning: Recent Advances and Testbed on AI-based Recruitment [66.91538273487379]
  There is a certain consensus about the need to develop AI applications with a Human-Centric approach. Human-Centric Machine Learning needs to be developed based on four main requirements: (i) utility and social good; (ii) privacy and data ownership; (iii) transparency and accountability; and (iv) fairness in AI-driven decision-making processes. We study how current multimodal algorithms based on heterogeneous sources of information are affected by sensitive elements and inner biases in the data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-13T16:44:44Z)
• A Transparency Index Framework for AI in Education [1.776308321589895]
  The main contribution of this study is that it highlights the importance of transparency in developing AI-powered educational technologies. We demonstrate how transparency enables the implementation of other ethical AI dimensions in Education like interpretability, accountability, and safety.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-09T10:10:47Z)
• Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
  Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations. It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z)
• Trustworthy AI: A Computational Perspective [54.80482955088197]
  We focus on six of the most crucial dimensions in achieving trustworthy AI: (i) Safety & Robustness, (ii) Non-discrimination & Fairness, (iii) Explainability, (iv) Privacy, (v) Accountability & Auditability, and (vi) Environmental Well-Being. For each dimension, we review the recent related technologies according to a taxonomy and summarize their applications in real-world systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-12T14:21:46Z)
• Building Bridges: Generative Artworks to Explore AI Ethics [56.058588908294446]
  In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis on understanding and mitigating adverse impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies on society. A significant challenge in the design of ethical AI systems is that there are multiple stakeholders in the AI pipeline, each with their own set of constraints and interests. This position paper outlines some potential ways in which generative artworks can play this role by serving as accessible and powerful educational tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-25T22:31:55Z)
• Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Making [53.62514158534574]
  We study whether features that reveal case-specific model information can calibrate trust and improve the joint performance of the human and AI. We show that confidence score can help calibrate people's trust in an AI model, but trust calibration alone is not sufficient to improve AI-assisted decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-07T15:33:48Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.