Subjective fairness in algorithmic decision-support

TL;DR

This paper critiques traditional objective fairness metrics in decision-making, emphasizing the importance of subjective perceptions and explanations to better reflect societal realities and stakeholder views.

Contribution

It introduces a subjective, bottom-up approach to fairness that incorporates stakeholder perceptions and uses explainable clustering to align treatment with individual views.

Findings

Traditional fairness metrics often overlook societal and cultural factors.

Subjective perceptions can be integrated into fairness assessments.

Explainable clustering helps align treatment with individual perceptions.

Abstract

The treatment of fairness in decision-making literature usually involves quantifying fairness using objective measures. This work takes a critical stance to highlight the limitations of these approaches (group fairness and individual fairness) using sociological insights. First, we expose how these metrics often fail to reflect societal realities. By neglecting crucial historical, cultural, and social factors, they fall short of capturing all discriminatory practices. Second, we redefine fairness as a subjective property moving from a top-down to a bottom-up approach. This shift allows the inclusion of diverse stakeholders perceptions, recognizing that fairness is not merely about objective metrics but also about individuals views on their treatment. Finally, we aim to use explanations as a mean to achieve fairness. Our approach employs explainable clustering to form groups based on individuals subjective perceptions to ensure that individuals who see themselves as similar receive similar treatment. We emphasize the role of explanations in achieving fairness, focusing not only on procedural fairness but also on providing subjective explanations to convince stakeholders of their fair treatment.