From Values to Frameworks: A Qualitative Study of Ethical Reasoning in Agentic AI Practitioners

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.06062v1
• Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2025 00:58:41 GMT
• Title: From Values to Frameworks: A Qualitative Study of Ethical Reasoning in Agentic AI Practitioners
• Authors: Theodore Roberts, Bahram Zarrin,
• Abstract summary: Agentic artificial intelligence systems are autonomous technologies capable of pursuing complex goals with minimal human oversight.<n>While these systems promise major gains in productivity, they also raise new ethical challenges.<n>This paper investigates the ethical reasoning of AI practitioners through qualitative interviews centered on structured dilemmas in agentic AI deployment.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Agentic artificial intelligence systems are autonomous technologies capable of pursuing complex goals with minimal human oversight and are rapidly emerging as the next frontier in AI. While these systems promise major gains in productivity, they also raise new ethical challenges. Prior research has examined how different populations prioritize Responsible AI values, yet little is known about how practitioners actually reason through the trade-offs inherent in designing these autonomous systems. This paper investigates the ethical reasoning of AI practitioners through qualitative interviews centered on structured dilemmas in agentic AI deployment. We find that the responses of practitioners do not merely reflect value preferences but rather align with three distinct reasoning frameworks. First is a Customer-Centric framework where choices are justified by business interests, legality, and user autonomy. Second is a Design-Centric framework emphasizing technical safeguards and system constraints. Third is an Ethics-Centric framework prioritizing social good and moral responsibility beyond compliance. We argue that these frameworks offer distinct and necessary insights for navigating ethical trade-offs. Consequently, providers of agentic AI must look beyond general principles and actively manage how these diverse reasoning frameworks are represented in their decision-making processes to ensure robust ethical outcomes.

Related papers

• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• Technology as uncharted territory: Contextual integrity and the notion of AI as new ethical ground [51.85131234265026]
  I argue that efforts to promote responsible and ethical AI can inadvertently contribute to and seemingly legitimize this disregard for established contextual norms.<n>I question the current narrow prioritization in AI ethics of moral innovation over moral preservation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-06T15:36:13Z)
• Delegating Responsibilities to Intelligent Autonomous Systems: Challenges and Benefits [1.7205106391379026]
  As AI systems operate with autonomy and adaptability, the traditional boundaries of moral responsibility in techno-social systems are being challenged.<n>This paper explores the evolving discourse on the delegation of responsibilities to intelligent autonomous agents and the ethical implications of such practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T18:40:38Z)
• POLARIS: A framework to guide the development of Trustworthy AI systems [3.02243271391691]
  There is a significant gap between high-level AI ethics principles and low-level concrete practices for AI professionals. We develop a novel holistic framework for Trustworthy AI - designed to bridge the gap between theory and practice. Our goal is to empower AI professionals to confidently navigate the ethical dimensions of Trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-08T01:05:16Z)
• Towards Responsible AI in Banking: Addressing Bias for Fair Decision-Making [69.44075077934914]
  "Responsible AI" emphasizes the critical nature of addressing biases within the development of a corporate culture. This thesis is structured around three fundamental pillars: understanding bias, mitigating bias, and accounting for bias. In line with open-source principles, we have released Bias On Demand and FairView as accessible Python packages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-13T14:07:09Z)
• Ethics in conversation: Building an ethics assurance case for autonomous AI-enabled voice agents in healthcare [1.8964739087256175]
  The principles-based ethics assurance argument pattern is one proposal in the AI ethics landscape. This paper presents the interim findings of a case study applying this ethics assurance framework to the use of Dora, an AI-based telemedicine system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T16:04:59Z)
• Connecting the Dots in Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence: From AI Principles, Ethics, and Key Requirements to Responsible AI Systems and Regulation [22.921683578188645]
  We argue that attaining truly trustworthy AI concerns the trustworthiness of all processes and actors that are part of the system's life cycle. A more holistic vision contemplates four essential axes: the global principles for ethical use and development of AI-based systems, a philosophical take on AI ethics, and a risk-based approach to AI regulation. Our multidisciplinary vision of trustworthy AI culminates in a debate on the diverging views published lately about the future of AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-02T09:49:53Z)
• AI Ethics: An Empirical Study on the Views of Practitioners and Lawmakers [8.82540441326446]
  Transparency, accountability, and privacy are the most critical AI ethics principles. Lack of ethical knowledge, no legal frameworks, and lacking monitoring bodies are the most common AI ethics challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T17:24:29Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• Metaethical Perspectives on 'Benchmarking' AI Ethics [81.65697003067841]
  Benchmarks are seen as the cornerstone for measuring technical progress in Artificial Intelligence (AI) research. An increasingly prominent research area in AI is ethics, which currently has no set of benchmarks nor commonly accepted way for measuring the 'ethicality' of an AI system. We argue that it makes more sense to talk about 'values' rather than 'ethics' when considering the possible actions of present and future AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-11T14:36:39Z)
• An interdisciplinary conceptual study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for helping benefit-risk assessment practices: Towards a comprehensive qualification matrix of AI programs and devices (pre-print 2020) [55.41644538483948]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of existing concepts coming from different disciplines tackling the notion of intelligence. The aim is to identify shared notions or discrepancies to consider for qualifying AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T12:01:31Z)

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.