Beyond the Algorithm: Professional Experiences and Perceptions of AI Bias

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.18289v1
• Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2026 00:59:17 GMT
• Title: Beyond the Algorithm: Professional Experiences and Perceptions of AI Bias
• Abstract summary: The purpose of this study was to examine how social bias emerges, is perceived, and can be mitigated within artificial intelligence and machine learning systems.<n>The study focused on the lived experiences and professional insights of AI practitioners rather than sector-specific populations.<n>Findings showed that algorithmic bias arises from historical inequities, exclusionary design assumptions, and organizational pressures that prioritize speed and efficiency over ethical reflection.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: The purpose of this qualitative multi-case study was to examine how social bias emerges, is perceived, and can be mitigated within artificial intelligence and machine learning systems by practitioners directly involved in their design, development, and governance. Although examples from healthcare, criminal justice, employment, and education were used to illustrate domains where automated systems shape everyday life, the study focused on the lived experiences and professional insights of AI practitioners rather than sector-specific populations. Guided by Intersectionality Theory and Cognitive Science, the study employed an interpretivist approach, utilizing semi-structured interviews with nine practitioners, supplemented by document analysis and triangulated case material to enrich contextual understanding. Findings showed that algorithmic bias arises from historical inequities, exclusionary design assumptions, and organizational pressures that prioritize speed and efficiency over ethical reflection. Participants emphasized that technical corrections alone cannot ensure fairness; instead, equitable AI requires structural accountability, diverse participation, and sustained cognitive awareness during the development lifecycle. Many described limited enforcement of ethical standards and organizational cultures that inconsistently support responsible practice. The study concludes that human-centered and socially grounded AI development depends on embedding ethics early in the design process, strengthening governance frameworks, and cultivating institutional environments that encourage reflective decision-making. These insights contribute to ongoing conversations on responsible AI and offer practical guidance for organizations seeking to design systems that are transparent, accountable, and aligned with the communities they affect.

Related papers

• AI Expert Twin: Capturing Expert Cognition for Human-Centred, Practice-Based Learning [3.934020982725159]
  This paper introduces the AI Expert Twin, a cognition-centric framework that models expert knowledge.<n>We formalise expert cognition as a three-layer representation and capture knowledge from experts under this model.<n>The framework is designed to be transferable across domains such as vocational education and creative industries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-02T11:47:39Z)
• Keeping an Eye on AI: A Framework for Effective Human Oversight of AI Systems [46.60248293123689]
  This paper advances a practical framework for effective human oversight of AI systems.<n>It draws on insights from computer science, human-computer interaction, psychology, philosophy, and law.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T22:35:41Z)
• Exploring Artificial Intelligence and Culture: Methodology for a comparative study of AI's impact on norms, trust, and problem-solving across academic and business environments [0.0]
  This paper proposes a rigorous framework to examine the two-way relationship between artificial intelligence (AI) and human cognition, problem-solving, and cultural adaptation.<n>We employ a three-wave longitudinal design that tracks AI knowledge, perceived competence, trust trajectories, and cultural responses.<n>We trace AI acculturation through phases of initial resistance, exploratory adoption, and cultural embedding, revealing distinctive trust curves and problem-solving strategies by context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T15:31:31Z)
• Diversity and Inclusion in AI: Insights from a Survey of AI/ML Practitioners [4.761639988815896]
  Growing awareness of social biases and inequalities embedded in Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems has brought increased attention to the integration of Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) principles throughout the AI lifecycle.<n>Despite the rise of ethical AI guidelines, there is limited empirical evidence on how D&I is applied in real-world settings.<n>This study explores how AI and Machine Learning(ML) practitioners perceive and implement D&I principles and identifies organisational challenges that hinder their effective adoption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-24T05:40:23Z)
• KERAIA: An Adaptive and Explainable Framework for Dynamic Knowledge Representation and Reasoning [46.85451489222176]
  KERAIA is a novel framework and software platform for symbolic knowledge engineering.<n>It addresses the persistent challenges of representing, reasoning with, and executing knowledge in dynamic, complex, and context-sensitive environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-07T10:56:05Z)
• Bridging the Gap: Integrating Ethics and Environmental Sustainability in AI Research and Practice [57.94036023167952]
  We argue that the efforts aiming to study AI's ethical ramifications should be made in tandem with those evaluating its impacts on the environment.<n>We propose best practices to better integrate AI ethics and sustainability in AI research and practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-01T13:53:11Z)
• Making Sense of AI Limitations: How Individual Perceptions Shape Organizational Readiness for AI Adoption [0.0]
  This study investigates how individuals' perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI) limitations influence organizational readiness for AI adoption.<n>The research reveals that organizational readiness emerges through dynamic interactions between individual sensemaking, social learning, and formal integration processes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T18:31:08Z)
• 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)
• The Participatory Turn in AI Design: Theoretical Foundations and the Current State of Practice [64.29355073494125]
  This article aims to ground what we dub the "participatory turn" in AI design by synthesizing existing theoretical literature on participation. We articulate empirical findings concerning the current state of participatory practice in AI design based on an analysis of recently published research and semi-structured interviews with 12 AI researchers and practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T05:30:42Z)
• 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)
• An Ecosystem Approach to Ethical AI and Data Use: Experimental Reflections [0.0]
  This paper offers a methodology to identify the needs of AI practitioners when it comes to confronting and resolving ethical challenges. We offer a grassroots approach to operational ethics based on dialog and mutualised responsibility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-27T07:41:26Z)

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.