ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT '22) (forthcoming)

Authors
Daniel Susser
Pennsylvania State University
Abstract
Existing discussions about automated decision-making focus primarily on its inputs and outputs, raising questions about data collection and privacy on one hand and accuracy and fairness on the other. Less attention has been devoted to critically examining the temporality of decision-making processes—the speed at which automated decisions are reached. In this paper, I identify four dimensions of algorithmic speed that merit closer analysis. Duration (how much time it takes to reach a judgment), timing (when automated systems intervene in the activity being evaluated), frequency (how often evaluations are performed), and lived time (the human experience of algorithmic speed) are interrelated, but distinct, features of automated decision-making. Choices about the temporal structure of automated decision-making systems have normative implications, which I describe in terms of "disruption," "displacement," "re-calibration," and "temporal fairness," with values such as accuracy, fairness, accountability, and legitimacy hanging in the balance. As computational tools are increasingly tasked with making judgments about human activities and practices, the designers of decision-making systems will have to reckon, I argue, with when—and how fast—judgments ought to be rendered. Though computers are capable of reaching decisions at incredible speeds, failing to account for the temporality of automated decision-making risks misapprehending the costs and benefits automation promises.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Thinking, Fast and Slow.Daniel Kahneman - 2011 - New York: New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
The Threat of Algocracy: Reality, Resistance and Accommodation.John Danaher - 2016 - Philosophy and Technology 29 (3):245-268.

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Algorithmic Accountability and Public Reason.Reuben Binns - 2018 - Philosophy and Technology 31 (4):543-556.
Algorithmisches Entscheiden, Ambiguitätstoleranz und die Frage nach dem Sinn.Lisa Herzog - 2021 - Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie 69 (2):197-213.
Dimensions of Majority Rule.Ogan Yumlu - 2019 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 45 (4):527-536.
On Algorithmic Fairness in Medical Practice.Thomas Grote & Geoff Keeling - 2022 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 31 (1):83-94.
Speed and Democracy: An Uneasy Dialogue.Jean Chesneaux - 2000 - Social Science Information 39 (3):407-420.
Democratizing Algorithmic Fairness.Pak-Hang Wong - 2020 - Philosophy and Technology 33 (2):225-244.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2022-04-09

Total views
47 ( #239,021 of 2,498,932 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
47 ( #17,944 of 2,498,932 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes