Shaping the Future of Generative AI for Black Communities: A Frame Analysis of Public Discourse and Empirical Scholarly Research

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.24767v1
• Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 16:05:45 GMT
• Title: Shaping the Future of Generative AI for Black Communities: A Frame Analysis of Public Discourse and Empirical Scholarly Research
• Abstract summary: We examine public discourse and empirical research to explore the impact of genAI systems on Black communities.<n>We conducted a systematic literature review ( SLR) of 91 empirical papers alongside a media discourse frame analysis of 28 public resources.<n>Our SLR reveals that scholarly research concentrates heavily on technical bias detection, reducing Blackness to measurable variables rather than engaging with cultural practices, structural conditions, or Black knowledge systems.
• Score: 15.341901187251699
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As generative AI (genAI) systems become embedded in education, employment, healthcare, and creative industries, the impact and engagement among marginalized groups have become both a widespread discourse and a focus in scholarly research. As a starting point, we examine public discourse and empirical research to explore the impact of genAI systems on Black communities. We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) of 91 empirical papers alongside a media discourse frame analysis of 28 public resources, applying Entman's framing theory to map how each corpus defines problems, attributes causes, and proposes treatments. Our SLR reveals that scholarly research concentrates heavily on technical bias detection, reducing Blackness to measurable variables rather than engaging with cultural practices, structural conditions, or Black knowledge systems. Our frame analysis reveals that public discourse attributes genAI-related harm to historical and systemic forces, while scholarly research stops its causal accounts at the dataset and its treatment recommendations at technical reform. We demonstrate that this misalignment is structurally produced: anti-Blackness operates simultaneously across both registers, generating a shared evacuation of Black epistemic agency. We argue for frame analysis as an AI ethics methodology capable of surfacing what technical evaluation forecloses.

Related papers

• Evaluating Large Language Models for Antisemitic Incident Classification [64.21103964951531]
  We introduce the task of hateful event detection and investigate the ability of AI systems to discover and classify reports of antisemitic events with fine-grained labels.<n>We evaluate OpenAI's GPT-4o and Meta's Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct on datasets containing antisemitic event descriptions from news articles, civil society reports, and official records.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-06T10:14:53Z)
• Machine Learning and Public Health: Identifying and Mitigating Algorithmic Bias through a Systematic Review [3.4137115855910767]
  Algorithmic bias in machine learning (ML) may inadvertently reinforce existing health disparities.<n>We present a systematic literature review of algorithmic bias identification, discussion, and reporting in Dutch public health ML research from 2021 to 2025.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T13:24:11Z)
• Yet another algorithmic bias: A Discursive Analysis of Large Language Models Reinforcing Dominant Discourses on Gender and Race [4.10874761487336]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained prominence and been applied in diverse contexts.<n>As they evolve into more sophisticated versions, it is essential to assess whether they reproduce biases, such as discrimination and racialization.<n>This study proposes a qualitative, discursive framework to complement such methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-14T03:22:02Z)
• A Unifying Bias-aware Multidisciplinary Framework for Investigating Socio-Technical Issues [6.307051347179095]
  This paper aims to bring together the disciplines of social science (SS) and computer science (CS)<n>Various analysis approaches from social science and machine learning (ML) were applied in a structured sequence to arrive at an original methodology of identifying and quantifying objects of inquiry.<n>A core feature of this framework is that it highlights where bias occurs and suggests possible steps to mitigate it.<n>To test our framework, we utilised it in the multidisciplinary investigation of the online harms encountered by minoritised ethnic (ME) communities when accessing and using digitalised social housing services in the UK.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-06T14:52:04Z)
• Hierarchical Narrative Analysis: Unraveling Perceptions of Generative AI [1.1874952582465599]
  We propose a method that leverages large language models (LLMs) to extract and organize these structures into a hierarchical framework. We validate this approach by analyzing public opinions on generative AI collected by Japan's Agency for Cultural Affairs. Our analysis provides clearer visualization of the factors influencing divergent opinions on generative AI, offering deeper insights into the structures of agreement and disagreement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-17T09:56:12Z)
• STRICTA: Structured Reasoning in Critical Text Assessment for Peer Review and Beyond [68.47402386668846]
  We introduce Structured Reasoning In Critical Text Assessment (STRICTA) to model text assessment as an explicit, step-wise reasoning process.<n>STRICTA breaks down the assessment into a graph of interconnected reasoning steps drawing on causality theory.<n>We apply STRICTA to a dataset of over 4000 reasoning steps from roughly 40 biomedical experts on more than 20 papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T06:55:37Z)
• The Case for Globalizing Fairness: A Mixed Methods Study on Colonialism, AI, and Health in Africa [16.7528939567041]
  We conduct a scoping review to propose axes of disparities for fairness consideration in the African context. We then conduct qualitative research studies with 672 general population study participants and 28 experts inML, health, and policy. Our analysis focuses on colonialism as the attribute of interest and examines the interplay between artificial intelligence (AI), health, and colonialism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-05T22:54:15Z)
• Exploring the Jungle of Bias: Political Bias Attribution in Language Models via Dependency Analysis [86.49858739347412]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked intense debate regarding the prevalence of bias in these models and its mitigation. We propose a prompt-based method for the extraction of confounding and mediating attributes which contribute to the decision process. We find that the observed disparate treatment can at least in part be attributed to confounding and mitigating attributes and model misalignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T00:02:25Z)
• Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey [73.87651986156006]
  We present a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs) We first consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing. We then unify the literature by proposing three intuitive, two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T00:32:55Z)
• Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
  We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs) We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date. We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)
• Multi-dimensional Racism Classification during COVID-19: Stigmatization, Offensiveness, Blame, and Exclusion [1.0878040851638]
  We develop a multi-dimensional model for racism detection, namely stigmatization, offensiveness, blame, and exclusion. This categorical detection enables insights into the underlying subtlety of racist discussion on digital platforms during COVID-19.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-29T00:38:56Z)
• Towards Identifying Social Bias in Dialog Systems: Frame, Datasets, and Benchmarks [95.29345070102045]
  In this paper, we focus our investigation on social bias detection of dialog safety problems. We first propose a novel Dial-Bias Frame for analyzing the social bias in conversations pragmatically. We introduce CDail-Bias dataset that is the first well-annotated Chinese social bias dialog dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-16T11:59:29Z)

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.