HCI.TOPHCI, made easy

arrow_backBack to questions View categoryarrow_forward

Fairness, Bias, and Research Governance / Algorithmic Decision Accountability, Contestability, and User Auditing

Non-standard interviewer behavior leads to poor candidate interview experiences.

lightbulbPractical problemAlgorithmic Decision Accountability, Contestability, and User Auditing

Non-standard interviewer behavior leads to poor candidate interview experiences.

IUI '23Interviewing the Interviewer: AI-generated Insights to Help Conduct Candidate-centric Interviews

Similar questions

lightbulbPractical problemAlgorithmic Decision Accountability, Contestability, and User Auditing

When selecting cities through LLMs, marginalized groups are overlooked, exacerbating inequality.

IUI '25Unequal Opportunities: Examining the Bias in Geographical Recommendations by Large Language Models

lightbulbPractical problemAlgorithmic Decision Accountability, Contestability, and User Auditing

Designers and researchers lack systematic frameworks to evaluate LLM applications and impacts.

CHI '25Understanding the LLM-ification of CHI: Unpacking the Impact of LLMs at CHI through a Systematic Literature Review

lightbulbPractical problemAlgorithmic Decision Accountability, Contestability, and User Auditing

Risk reports in AI model files lack diversity and practicality, making risk assessment difficult for users.

CHI '25RiskRAG: A Data-Driven Solution for Improved AI Model Risk Reporting

lightbulbPractical problemAlgorithmic Decision Accountability, Contestability, and User Auditing

The public perceives algorithms as unfair, especially in high-stakes decisions involving race and gender.

CHI '25Lay Perceptions of Algorithmic Discrimination in the Context of Systemic Injustice

lightbulbPractical problemAlgorithmic Decision Accountability, Contestability, and User Auditing

AI systems often fail to meet real-world needs, causing errors or wasted resources.

CHI '25AI Mismatches: Identifying Potential Algorithmic Harms Before AI Development

lightbulbPractical problemAlgorithmic Decision Accountability, Contestability, and User Auditing

Scientific organizations struggle to balance the potential of generative AI with its risks.

CHI '25Generative AI Uses and Risks for Knowledge Workers in a Science Organization

Related papers

Unequal Opportunities: Examining the Bias in Geographical Recommendations by Large Language Models

Shiran Dudy, Thulasi Tholeti, Resmi Ramachandranpillai

Understanding the LLM-ification of CHI: Unpacking the Impact of LLMs at CHI through a Systematic Literature Review

Rock Yuren Pang, Hope Schroeder, Kynnedy Simone Smith

RiskRAG: A Data-Driven Solution for Improved AI Model Risk Reporting

Pooja S. B. Rao, Sanja Scepanovic, Ke Zhou

Lay Perceptions of Algorithmic Discrimination in the Context of Systemic Injustice

Gabriel Lima, Nina Grgić-Hlača, Markus Langer

AI Mismatches: Identifying Potential Algorithmic Harms Before AI Development

Devansh Saxena, Ji-Youn Jung, Jodi Forlizzi

Generative AI Uses and Risks for Knowledge Workers in a Science Organization

Kelly B. Wagman, Matthew T Dearing, Marshini Chetty

Generative Ghosts: Anticipating Benefits and Risks of AI Afterlives

Meredith Ringel Morris, Jed R. Brubaker

Towards Effective Human Intervention in Algorithmic Decision-Making: Understanding the Effect of Decision-Makers' Configuration on Decision-Subjects' Fairness Perceptions

Mireia Yurrita, Himanshu Verma, Agathe Balayn

Building an Ethics-Focused Action Plan: Roles, Process Moves, and Trajectories

Colin M. Gray, Ike Obi, Shruthi Sai Chivukula

(Beyond) Reasonable Doubt: Challenges that Public Defenders Face in Scrutinizing AI in Court

Angela Jin, Niloufar Salehi

(Un)making AI Magic: A Design Taxonomy

Maria Luce Lupetti, Dave Murray-Rust

"This is not a data problem": Algorithms and Power in Public Higher Education in Canada

Kelly McConvey, Shion Guha