AI: Friend or foe of fairness perceptions of the tax administration? A survey experiment on citizens' procedural fairness perceptions

IF 10 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly Pub Date : 2025-01-14 DOI:10.1016/j.giq.2024.102002

Anouk Decuypere, Anne Van de Vijver

{"title":"AI: Friend or foe of fairness perceptions of the tax administration? A survey experiment on citizens' procedural fairness perceptions","authors":"Anouk Decuypere, Anne Van de Vijver","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2024.102002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Governments are increasingly using AI for their decision making. Research on citizen perceptions highlight the context-dependent nature of their fairness assessment, rendering administrations unsure about how to implement AI so that citizens support these procedures. The survey experiments in this study, conducted in a pilot and a main study, (N<sub>pilot</sub> = 232; N<sub>main study</sub> = 2366) focuses on a high-risk decision-making context, i.e., selection of citizens for fraud detection. In the scenarios, we manipulated the proportion of the selection made by AI, based on information from past fraudsters, versus civil servants, who work based on their experience. In addition, we tested the effect of transparency (and explanation) statements and its impact on procedural fairness scores. We found that a higher proportion of AI in the selection for fraud audits was perceived as more procedurally fair, mostly through increased scores on bias suppression and consistency. However, participants' general attitude toward AI and trust in the administration explained more variance than the experimental manipulation. Transparency (explanations) had no impact.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 1","pages":"Article 102002"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Government Information Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740624X24000947","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Governments are increasingly using AI for their decision making. Research on citizen perceptions highlight the context-dependent nature of their fairness assessment, rendering administrations unsure about how to implement AI so that citizens support these procedures. The survey experiments in this study, conducted in a pilot and a main study, (N_pilot = 232; N_{main study} = 2366) focuses on a high-risk decision-making context, i.e., selection of citizens for fraud detection. In the scenarios, we manipulated the proportion of the selection made by AI, based on information from past fraudsters, versus civil servants, who work based on their experience. In addition, we tested the effect of transparency (and explanation) statements and its impact on procedural fairness scores. We found that a higher proportion of AI in the selection for fraud audits was perceived as more procedurally fair, mostly through increased scores on bias suppression and consistency. However, participants' general attitude toward AI and trust in the administration explained more variance than the experimental manipulation. Transparency (explanations) had no impact.

查看原文本刊更多论文

AI：对税收公平的看法是敌是友？公民程序公平感知的调查实验

政府越来越多地使用人工智能进行决策。对公民感知的研究强调了其公平性评估的情境依赖性质，这使得行政部门不确定如何实施人工智能以使公民支持这些程序。本研究的调查实验分为先导研究和主研究，(Npilot = 232；（主要研究= 2366）侧重于高风险决策环境，即选择公民进行欺诈检测。在这些场景中，我们根据过去的欺诈者的信息，对人工智能做出的选择的比例进行了操纵，而公务员则根据自己的经验工作。此外，我们测试了透明度（和解释）陈述的效果及其对程序公平得分的影响。我们发现，在欺诈审计的选择中，人工智能的比例越高，被认为在程序上更公平，这主要是通过增加偏见抑制和一致性的得分来实现的。然而，参与者对人工智能的总体态度和对政府的信任比实验操作解释了更多的差异。透明度（解释）没有影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Government Information Quarterly INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-

CiteScore

15.70

自引率

16.70%

发文量

106

期刊介绍： Government Information Quarterly (GIQ) delves into the convergence of policy, information technology, government, and the public. It explores the impact of policies on government information flows, the role of technology in innovative government services, and the dynamic between citizens and governing bodies in the digital age. GIQ serves as a premier journal, disseminating high-quality research and insights that bridge the realms of policy, information technology, government, and public engagement.