O. C. Ferrell, Dana E. Harrison, Linda K. Ferrell, Haya Ajjan, Bryan W. Hochstein
{"title":"A theoretical framework to guide AI ethical decision making","authors":"O. C. Ferrell, Dana E. Harrison, Linda K. Ferrell, Haya Ajjan, Bryan W. Hochstein","doi":"10.1007/s13162-024-00275-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Artificial Intelligence (AI) ethics is needed to address the risks that are outpacing efforts to protect consumers and society. AI is becoming human-competitive with the ability to perform tasks, that without controls, can result in harmful or destructive actions. Principles are currently the most discussed ethical approach for pervasive boundaries for algorithmic rule-based intelligence. Principles, values, norms, and rules should be the foundation of an ethical corporate culture with all participants aware of and involved in developing AI ethics. To address these concerns, a theory-based decision framework is presented to incorporate ethical considerations into AI applications. With limited discussion on frameworks to manage AI ethics, we provide a modification of the Hunt–Vitell (H–V) ethical decision model to provide a supportive theoretical framework. This model considers the cultural, industry, organizational, and legal standards that shape AI ethical decision making. The model is based on individual decision making and parallels the decision process in autonomous AI system decision making. Topics for additional research are advanced to create expanded knowledge on this topic.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7786,"journal":{"name":"AMS Review","volume":"14 1-2","pages":"53 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMS Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13162-024-00275-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) ethics is needed to address the risks that are outpacing efforts to protect consumers and society. AI is becoming human-competitive with the ability to perform tasks, that without controls, can result in harmful or destructive actions. Principles are currently the most discussed ethical approach for pervasive boundaries for algorithmic rule-based intelligence. Principles, values, norms, and rules should be the foundation of an ethical corporate culture with all participants aware of and involved in developing AI ethics. To address these concerns, a theory-based decision framework is presented to incorporate ethical considerations into AI applications. With limited discussion on frameworks to manage AI ethics, we provide a modification of the Hunt–Vitell (H–V) ethical decision model to provide a supportive theoretical framework. This model considers the cultural, industry, organizational, and legal standards that shape AI ethical decision making. The model is based on individual decision making and parallels the decision process in autonomous AI system decision making. Topics for additional research are advanced to create expanded knowledge on this topic.
AMS ReviewBusiness, Management and Accounting-Marketing
CiteScore
14.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍:
The AMS Review is positioned to be the premier journal in marketing that focuses exclusively on conceptual contributions across all sub-disciplines of marketing. It publishes articles that advance the development of market and marketing theory.The AMS Review is receptive to different philosophical perspectives and levels of analysis that range from micro to macro. Especially welcome are manuscripts that integrate research and theory from non-marketing disciplines such as management, sociology, economics, psychology, geography, anthropology, or other social sciences. Examples of suitable manuscripts include those incorporating conceptual and organizing frameworks or models, those extending, comparing, or critically evaluating existing theories, and those suggesting new or innovative theories. Comprehensive and integrative syntheses of research literatures (including quantitative and qualitative meta-analyses) are encouraged, as are paradigm-shifting manuscripts.Manuscripts that focus on purely descriptive literature reviews, proselytize research methods or techniques, or report empirical research findings will not be considered for publication. The AMS Review does not publish manuscripts focusing on practitioner advice or marketing education.