When Trust is Zero Sum: Automation Threat to Epistemic Agency
Clicks: 93
ID: 281928
2024
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
27.6
/100
93 views
35 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #234 of 803 articles by views in arXiv
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 803 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
AI researchers and ethicists have long worried about the threat that
automation poses to human dignity, autonomy, and to the sense of personal value
that is tied to work. Typically, proposed solutions to this problem focus on
ways in which we can reduce the number of job losses which result from
automation, ways to retrain those that lose their jobs, or ways to mitigate the
social consequences of those job losses. However, even in cases where workers
keep their jobs, their agency within them might be severely downgraded. For
instance, human employees might work alongside AI but not be allowed to make
decisions or not be allowed to make decisions without consulting with or coming
to agreement with the AI. This is a kind of epistemic harm (which could be an
injustice if it is distributed on the basis of identity prejudice). It
diminishes human agency (in constraining people's ability to act
independently), and it fails to recognize the workers' epistemic agency as
qualified experts. Workers, in this case, aren't given the trust they are
entitled to. This means that issues of human dignity remain even in cases where
everyone keeps their job. Further, job retention focused solutions, such as
designing an algorithm to work alongside the human employee, may only enable
these harms. Here, we propose an alternative design solution, adversarial
collaboration, which addresses the traditional retention problem of automation,
but also addresses the larger underlying problem of epistemic harms and the
distribution of trust between AI and humans in the workplace.
| Reference Key |
varshney2024when
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Emmie Malone; Saleh Afroogh; Jason DCruz; Kush R Varshney |
| Journal | arXiv |
| Year | 2024 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.