Nationality, Race, and Ethnicity Biases in and Consequences of Detecting AI-Generated Self-Presentations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.18647v1
• Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 18:31:44 GMT
• Title: Nationality, Race, and Ethnicity Biases in and Consequences of Detecting AI-Generated Self-Presentations
• Authors: Haoran Chu, Linjuan Rita Men, Sixiao Liu, Shupei Yuan, Yuan Sun,
• Abstract summary: Content, such as linguistic style, played a dominant role in AI detection. Asian and Hispanic applicants were more likely to be judged as AI users when labeled as domestic students.
• Score: 1.6772190302364975
• License:
• Abstract: This study builds on person perception and human AI interaction (HAII) theories to investigate how content and source cues, specifically race, ethnicity, and nationality, affect judgments of AI-generated content in a high-stakes self-presentation context: college applications. Results of a pre-registered experiment with a nationally representative U.S. sample (N = 644) show that content heuristics, such as linguistic style, played a dominant role in AI detection. Source heuristics, such as nationality, also emerged as a significant factor, with international students more likely to be perceived as using AI, especially when their statements included AI-sounding features. Interestingly, Asian and Hispanic applicants were more likely to be judged as AI users when labeled as domestic students, suggesting interactions between racial stereotypes and AI detection. AI attribution led to lower perceptions of personal statement quality and authenticity, as well as negative evaluations of the applicant's competence, sociability, morality, and future success.

Related papers

• Perceptions of Discriminatory Decisions of Artificial Intelligence: Unpacking the Role of Individual Characteristics [0.0]
  Personal differences (digital self-efficacy, technical knowledge, belief in equality, political ideology) are associated with perceptions of AI outcomes. Digital self-efficacy and technical knowledge are positively associated with attitudes toward AI. Liberal ideologies are negatively associated with outcome trust, higher negative emotion, and greater skepticism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T06:18:26Z)
• Biased AI can Influence Political Decision-Making [64.9461133083473]
  This paper presents two experiments investigating the effects of partisan bias in AI language models on political decision-making. We found that participants exposed to politically biased models were significantly more likely to adopt opinions and make decisions aligning with the AI's bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T22:56:00Z)
• Human Bias in the Face of AI: The Role of Human Judgement in AI Generated Text Evaluation [48.70176791365903]
  This study explores how bias shapes the perception of AI versus human generated content. We investigated how human raters respond to labeled and unlabeled content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-29T04:31:45Z)
• Unmasking Nationality Bias: A Study of Human Perception of Nationalities in AI-Generated Articles [10.8637226966191]
  We investigate the potential for nationality biases in natural language processing (NLP) models using human evaluation methods. Our study employs a two-step mixed-methods approach to identify and understand the impact of nationality bias in a text generation model. Our findings reveal that biased NLP models tend to replicate and amplify existing societal biases, which can translate to harm if used in a sociotechnical setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-08T15:46:27Z)
• Bending the Automation Bias Curve: A Study of Human and AI-based Decision Making in National Security Contexts [0.0]
  We theorize about the relationship between background knowledge about AI, trust in AI, and how these interact with other factors to influence the probability of automation bias. We test these in a preregistered task identification experiment across a representative sample of 9000 adults in 9 countries with varying levels of AI industries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-28T18:57:36Z)
• Fairness in AI and Its Long-Term Implications on Society [68.8204255655161]
  We take a closer look at AI fairness and analyze how lack of AI fairness can lead to deepening of biases over time. We discuss how biased models can lead to more negative real-world outcomes for certain groups. If the issues persist, they could be reinforced by interactions with other risks and have severe implications on society in the form of social unrest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-16T11:22:59Z)
• Fairness And Bias in Artificial Intelligence: A Brief Survey of Sources, Impacts, And Mitigation Strategies [11.323961700172175]
  This survey paper offers a succinct, comprehensive overview of fairness and bias in AI. We review sources of bias, such as data, algorithm, and human decision biases. We assess the societal impact of biased AI systems, focusing on the perpetuation of inequalities and the reinforcement of harmful stereotypes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-16T03:23:55Z)
• 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)
• FATE in AI: Towards Algorithmic Inclusivity and Accessibility [0.0]
  To prevent algorithmic disparities, fairness, accountability, transparency, and ethics (FATE) in AI are being implemented. This study examines FATE-related desiderata, particularly transparency and ethics, in areas of the global South that are underserved by AI. To promote inclusivity, a community-led strategy is proposed to collect and curate representative data for responsible AI design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-03T15:08:10Z)
• How Different Groups Prioritize Ethical Values for Responsible AI [75.40051547428592]
  Private companies, public sector organizations, and academic groups have outlined ethical values they consider important for responsible AI technologies. While their recommendations converge on a set of central values, little is known about the values a more representative public would find important for the AI technologies they interact with and might be affected by. We conducted a survey examining how individuals perceive and prioritize responsible AI values across three groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-16T14:39:37Z)
• 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)

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.