{"title":"人脸识别技术伦理规范:内容分析与回顾","authors":"A. Roundtree","doi":"10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports insights from content and rhetorical analyses of codes of ethics (COEs) for designing facial recognition technology (FRT). The paper considers 16 new codes of ethics created for engineers to follow as they design FRT considering its social implications. It contributes to the literature by providing insights into what domains and dimensions emerge from codes of ethics specifically designed to encourage accountability in FRT design. We searched several research databases and conducted Google searches to identify FRT codes of ethics published between 2010 and 2020. The search yielded 16 lists of principles. Analysis revealed that FRT codes of ethics retain many domains typical of engineering codes of ethics, including professionalism and abiding by industry standards. However, the nature of FRT also required additional domains, including rights, consent, and accountability. Themes not only invoked characteristics necessary for engineers to follow but also expected FRT characteristics, such as transparency about errors and bias. FRT codes of ethics show what the industry expects of the actor-network created by FRT deployments and the engineers who design them. FRT codes of ethics are closed-system symbolic and persuasive processes that establish collective perceptions derived from prescriptions from leadership or professional organizations.","PeriodicalId":286504,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)","volume":"119 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Facial Recognition Technology Codes of Ethics: Content Analysis and Review\",\"authors\":\"A. Roundtree\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00045\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper reports insights from content and rhetorical analyses of codes of ethics (COEs) for designing facial recognition technology (FRT). The paper considers 16 new codes of ethics created for engineers to follow as they design FRT considering its social implications. It contributes to the literature by providing insights into what domains and dimensions emerge from codes of ethics specifically designed to encourage accountability in FRT design. We searched several research databases and conducted Google searches to identify FRT codes of ethics published between 2010 and 2020. The search yielded 16 lists of principles. Analysis revealed that FRT codes of ethics retain many domains typical of engineering codes of ethics, including professionalism and abiding by industry standards. However, the nature of FRT also required additional domains, including rights, consent, and accountability. Themes not only invoked characteristics necessary for engineers to follow but also expected FRT characteristics, such as transparency about errors and bias. FRT codes of ethics show what the industry expects of the actor-network created by FRT deployments and the engineers who design them. FRT codes of ethics are closed-system symbolic and persuasive processes that establish collective perceptions derived from prescriptions from leadership or professional organizations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":286504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)\",\"volume\":\"119 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00045\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Facial Recognition Technology Codes of Ethics: Content Analysis and Review
This paper reports insights from content and rhetorical analyses of codes of ethics (COEs) for designing facial recognition technology (FRT). The paper considers 16 new codes of ethics created for engineers to follow as they design FRT considering its social implications. It contributes to the literature by providing insights into what domains and dimensions emerge from codes of ethics specifically designed to encourage accountability in FRT design. We searched several research databases and conducted Google searches to identify FRT codes of ethics published between 2010 and 2020. The search yielded 16 lists of principles. Analysis revealed that FRT codes of ethics retain many domains typical of engineering codes of ethics, including professionalism and abiding by industry standards. However, the nature of FRT also required additional domains, including rights, consent, and accountability. Themes not only invoked characteristics necessary for engineers to follow but also expected FRT characteristics, such as transparency about errors and bias. FRT codes of ethics show what the industry expects of the actor-network created by FRT deployments and the engineers who design them. FRT codes of ethics are closed-system symbolic and persuasive processes that establish collective perceptions derived from prescriptions from leadership or professional organizations.