An official website of the United States government
Ensuring fairness is crucial in developing modern algorithms and tests. To address potential biases and discrimination in algorithmic decision making, researchers have drawn insights from the test fairness literature, notably the work on differential algorithmic functioning (DAF) by Suk and Han. Nevertheless, the exploration of intersectionality in fairness investigations, within both test fairness and algorithmic fairness fields, is still relatively new. In this paper, we propose an extension of the DAF framework to include the concept of intersectionality. Similar to DAF, the proposed notion for intersectionality, which we term “interactive DAF,” leverages ideas from test fairness and algorithmic fairness. We also provide methods based on the generalized Mantel–Haenszel test, generalized logistic regression, and regularized group regression to detect DAF, interactive DAF, or other subtypes of DAF. Specifically, we employ regularized group regression with three different penalties and examine their performance via a simulation study. Finally, we demonstrate our intersectional DAF framework in real-world applications on grade retention and conditional cash transfer programs in education.
more »
« less
A Psychometric Framework for Evaluating Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making: Differential Algorithmic Functioning
As algorithmic decision making is increasingly deployed in every walk of life, many researchers have raised concerns about fairness-related bias from such algorithms. But there is little research on harnessing psychometric methods to uncover potential discriminatory bias inside decision-making algorithms. The main goal of this article is to propose a new framework for algorithmic fairness based on differential item functioning (DIF), which has been commonly used to measure item fairness in psychometrics. Our fairness notion, which we call differential algorithmic functioning (DAF), is defined based on three pieces of information: a decision variable, a “fair” variable, and a protected variable such as race or gender. Under the DAF framework, an algorithm can exhibit uniform DAF, nonuniform DAF, or neither (i.e., non-DAF). For detecting DAF, we provide modifications of well-established DIF methods: Mantel–Haenszel test, logistic regression, and residual-based DIF. We demonstrate our framework through a real dataset concerning decision-making algorithms for grade retention in K–12 education in the United States.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2225321
- PAR ID:
- 10412872
- Publisher / Repository:
- DOI PREFIX: 10.3102
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics
- Volume:
- 49
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 1076-9986
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 151-172
- Size(s):
- p. 151-172
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)Graph mining is an essential component of recommender systems and search engines. Outputs of graph mining models typically provide a ranked list sorted by each item's relevance or utility. However, recent research has identified issues of algorithmic bias in such models, and new graph mining algorithms have been proposed to correct for bias. As such, algorithm developers need tools that can help them uncover potential biases in their models while also exploring the impacts of correcting for biases when employing fairness-aware algorithms. In this paper, we present FairRankVis, a visual analytics framework designed to enable the exploration of multi-class bias in graph mining algorithms. We support both group and individual fairness levels of comparison. Our framework is designed to enable model developers to compare multi-class fairness between algorithms (for example, comparing PageRank with a debiased PageRank algorithm) to assess the impacts of algorithmic debiasing with respect to group and individual fairness. We demonstrate our framework through two usage scenarios inspecting algorithmic fairness.more » « less
-
Algorithmic decision-making systems are increasingly used throughout the public and private sectors to make important decisions or assist humans in making these decisions with real social consequences. While there has been substantial research in recent years to build fair decision-making algorithms, there has been less research seeking to understand the factors that affect people's perceptions of fairness in these systems, which we argue is also important for their broader acceptance. In this research, we conduct an online experiment to better understand perceptions of fairness, focusing on three sets of factors: algorithm outcomes, algorithm development and deployment procedures, and individual differences. We find that people rate the algorithm as more fair when the algorithm predicts in their favor, even surpassing the negative effects of describing algorithms that are very biased against particular demographic groups. We find that this effect is moderated by several variables, including participants' education level, gender, and several aspects of the development procedure. Our findings suggest that systems that evaluate algorithmic fairness through users' feedback must consider the possibility of "outcome favorability" bias.more » « less
-
Abstract Automated, data‐driven decision making is increasingly common in a variety of application domains. In educational software, for example, machine learning has been applied to tasks like selecting the next exercise for students to complete. Machine learning methods, however, are not always equally effective for all groups of students. Current approaches to designing fair algorithms tend to focus on statistical measures concerning a small subset of legally protected categories like race or gender. Focusing solely on legally protected categories, however, can limit our understanding of bias and unfairness by ignoring the complexities of identity. We propose an alternative approach to categorization, grounded in sociological techniques of measuring identity. By soliciting survey data and interviews from the population being studied, we can build context‐specific categories from the bottom up. The emergent categories can then be combined with extant algorithmic fairness strategies to discover which identity groups are not well‐served, and thus where algorithms should be improved or avoided altogether. We focus on educational applications but present arguments that this approach should be adopted more broadly for issues of algorithmic fairness across a variety of applications.more » « less
-
When measuring academic skills among students whose primary language is not English, standardized assessments are often provided in languages other than English. The degree to which alternate-language test translations yield unbiased, equitable assessment must be evaluated; however, traditional methods of investigating measurement equivalence are susceptible to confounding group differences. The primary purposes of this study were to investigate differential item functioning (DIF) and item bias across Spanish and English forms of an assessment of early mathematics skills. Secondary purposes were to investigate the presence of selection bias and demonstrate a novel approach for investigating DIF that uses a regression discontinuity design framework to control for selection bias. Data were drawn from 1,750 Spanish-speaking Kindergarteners participating in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998–1999, who were administered either the Spanish or English version of the mathematics assessment based on their performance on an English language screening measure. Evidence of selection bias—differences between groups in SES, age, approaches to learning, self-control, social interaction, country of birth, childcare, household composition and number in the home, books in the home, and parent involvement—highlighted limitations of a traditional approach for investigating DIF that only controlled for ability. When controlling for selection bias, only 11% of items displayed DIF, and subsequent examination of item content did not suggest item bias. Results provide evidence that the Spanish translation of the ECLS-K mathematics assessment is an equitable and unbiased assessment accommodation for young dual language learners.more » « less
