From Expectation to Habit: Why Do Software Practitioners Adopt Fairness Toolkits?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.13846v2
• Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 10:22:55 GMT
• Title: From Expectation to Habit: Why Do Software Practitioners Adopt Fairness Toolkits?
• Authors: Gianmario Voria, Stefano Lambiase, Maria Concetta Schiavone, Gemma Catolino, Fabio Palomba,
• Abstract summary: This study investigates the factors influencing the adoption of fairness toolkits from an individual perspective. Our findings reveal that performance expectancy and habit are the primary drivers of fairness toolkit adoption. Practical recommendations include improving toolkit usability, integrating bias mitigation processes into routine development, and providing ongoing support.
• Score: 11.05629708648904
• License:
• Abstract: As the adoption of machine learning (ML) systems continues to grow across industries, concerns about fairness and bias in these systems have taken center stage. Fairness toolkits, designed to mitigate bias in ML models, serve as critical tools for addressing these ethical concerns. However, their adoption in the context of software development remains underexplored, especially regarding the cognitive and behavioral factors driving their usage. As a deeper understanding of these factors could be pivotal in refining tool designs and promoting broader adoption, this study investigates the factors influencing the adoption of fairness toolkits from an individual perspective. Guided by the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2), we examined the factors shaping the intention to adopt and actual use of fairness toolkits. Specifically, we employed Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to analyze data from a survey study involving practitioners in the software industry. Our findings reveal that performance expectancy and habit are the primary drivers of fairness toolkit adoption. These insights suggest that by emphasizing the effectiveness of these tools in mitigating bias and fostering habitual use, organizations can encourage wider adoption. Practical recommendations include improving toolkit usability, integrating bias mitigation processes into routine development workflows, and providing ongoing support to ensure professionals see clear benefits from regular use.

Related papers

• Adaptive Tool Use in Large Language Models with Meta-Cognition Trigger [49.81945268343162]
  We propose MeCo, an adaptive decision-making strategy for external tool use. MeCo captures high-level cognitive signals in the representation space, guiding when to invoke tools. Our experiments show that MeCo accurately detects LLMs' internal cognitive signals and significantly improves tool-use decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T15:45:01Z)
• From Exploration to Mastery: Enabling LLMs to Master Tools via Self-Driven Interactions [60.733557487886635]
  This paper focuses on bridging the comprehension gap between Large Language Models and external tools. We propose a novel framework, DRAFT, aimed at Dynamically refining tool documentation. Extensive experiments on multiple datasets demonstrate that DRAFT's iterative, feedback-based refinement significantly ameliorates documentation quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:58:44Z)
• Initial Insights on MLOps: Perception and Adoption by Practitioners [9.777475640906404]
  MLOps (Machine Learning and Operations) guidelines have emerged as the principal reference in this field. Despite the introduction of MLOps guidelines, there is still a degree of skepticism surrounding their implementation. This study aims to provide deeper insight into MLOps and its impact on the next phase of innovation in machine learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-01T11:08:29Z)
• LLMs in the Imaginarium: Tool Learning through Simulated Trial and Error [54.954211216847135]
  Existing large language models (LLMs) only reach a correctness rate in the range of 30% to 60%. We propose a biologically inspired method for tool-augmented LLMs, simulated trial and error (STE) STE orchestrates three key mechanisms for successful tool use behaviors in the biological system: trial and error, imagination, and memory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-07T18:50:51Z)
• Charting a Path to Efficient Onboarding: The Role of Software Visualization [49.1574468325115]
  The present study aims to explore the familiarity of managers, leaders, and developers with software visualization tools. This approach incorporated quantitative and qualitative analyses of data collected from practitioners using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T21:30:45Z)
• Toward Operationalizing Pipeline-aware ML Fairness: A Research Agenda for Developing Practical Guidelines and Tools [18.513353100744823]
  Recent work has called on the ML community to take a more holistic approach to tackle fairness issues. We first demonstrate that without clear guidelines and toolkits, even individuals with specialized ML knowledge find it challenging to hypothesize how various design choices influence model behavior. We then consult the fair-ML literature to understand the progress to date toward operationalizing the pipeline-aware approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T15:48:26Z)
• LLM-based Interaction for Content Generation: A Case Study on the Perception of Employees in an IT department [85.1523466539595]
  This paper presents a questionnaire survey to identify the intention to use generative tools by employees of an IT company. Our results indicate a rather average acceptability of generative tools, although the more useful the tool is perceived to be, the higher the intention seems to be. Our analyses suggest that the frequency of use of generative tools is likely to be a key factor in understanding how employees perceive these tools in the context of their work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-18T15:35:43Z)
• Exploring How Machine Learning Practitioners (Try To) Use Fairness Toolkits [35.7895677378462]
  We investigate how industry practitioners (try to) work with existing fairness toolkits. We identify several opportunities for fairness toolkits to better address practitioner needs. We highlight implications for the design of future open-source fairness toolkits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-13T23:07:46Z)
• A Framework for Fairness: A Systematic Review of Existing Fair AI Solutions [4.594159253008448]
  A large portion of fairness research has gone to producing tools that machine learning practitioners can use to audit for bias while designing their algorithms. There is a lack of application of these fairness solutions in practice. This review provides an in-depth summary of the algorithmic bias issues that have been defined and the fairness solution space that has been proposed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-10T17:51:20Z)
• Leveraging Expert Consistency to Improve Algorithmic Decision Support [62.61153549123407]
  We explore the use of historical expert decisions as a rich source of information that can be combined with observed outcomes to narrow the construct gap. We propose an influence function-based methodology to estimate expert consistency indirectly when each case in the data is assessed by a single expert. Our empirical evaluation, using simulations in a clinical setting and real-world data from the child welfare domain, indicates that the proposed approach successfully narrows the construct gap.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-24T05:40:29Z)

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.