Roles for Computing in Social Change

Abstract

A recent normative turn in computer science has brought concerns about fairness, bias, and accountability to the core of the field. Yet recent scholarship has warned that much of this technical work treats problematic features of the status quo as fixed, and fails to address deeper patterns of injustice and inequality. While acknowledging these critiques, we posit that computational research has valuable roles to play in addressing social problems -- roles whose value can be recognized even from a perspective that aspires toward fundamental social change. In this paper, we articulate four such roles, through an analysis that considers the opportunities as well as the significant risks inherent in such work. Computing research can serve as a diagnostic, helping us to understand and measure social problems with precision and clarity. As a formalizer, computing shapes how social problems are explicitly defined --- changing how those problems, and possible responses to them, are understood. Computing serves as rebuttal when it illuminates the boundaries of what is possible through technical means. And computing acts as synecdoche when it makes long-standing social problems newly salient in the public eye. We offer these paths forward as modalities that leverage the particular strengths of computational work in the service of social change, without overclaiming computing's capacity to solve social problems on its own.

References in corpus (3)

• Model Cards for Model Reporting
• Discrimination through optimization: How Facebook's ad delivery can lead to skewed outcomes
• Problem Formulation and Fairness

Cited by in corpus (30)

• Expressing stigma and inappropriate responses prevents LLMs from safely replacing mental health providers
• Do Datasets Have Politics? Disciplinary Values in Computer Vision Dataset Development
• Jury Learning: Integrating Dissenting Voices into Machine Learning Models
• Harms from Increasingly Agentic Algorithmic Systems
• Envisioning Communities: A Participatory Approach Towards AI for Social Good
• Algorithms and Decision-Making in the Public Sector
• Escaping the Impossibility of Fairness: From Formal to Substantive Algorithmic Fairness
• Understanding Practices, Challenges, and Opportunities for User-Engaged Algorithm Auditing in Industry Practice
• Can Workers Meaningfully Consent to Workplace Wellbeing Technologies?
• Four Years of FAccT: A Reflexive, Mixed-Methods Analysis of Research Contributions, Shortcomings, and Future Prospects
• The Algorithmic Imprint
• Inherent Limitations of AI Fairness
• Unpacking Invisible Work Practices, Constraints, and Latent Power Relationships in Child Welfare through Casenote Analysis
• A Human-Centered Review of Algorithms in Decision-Making in Higher Education
• What-is and How-to for Fairness in Machine Learning: A Survey, Reflection, and Perspective
• FATE in AI: Towards Algorithmic Inclusivity and Accessibility
• Epistemic Power in AI Ethics Labor: Legitimizing Located Complaints
• Do Abstractions Have Politics? Toward a More Critical Algorithm Analysis
• Cura: Curation at Social Media Scale
• Gender Bias Detection in Court Decisions: A Brazilian Case Study
• Quantifying Community Characteristics of Maternal Mortality Using Social Media
• On the Effect of Triadic Closure on Network Segregation
• Towards Creating Infrastructures for Values and Ethics Work in the Production of Software Technologies
• Designing Human-Centered Algorithms for the Public Sector: A Case Study of the U.S. Child-Welfare System
• Articulation Work and Tinkering for Fairness in Machine Learning
• Adversarial Scrutiny of Evidentiary Statistical Software
• Bias, Consistency, and Partisanship in U.S. Asylum Cases: A Machine Learning Analysis of Extraneous Factors in Immigration Court Decisions
• Discovering and Interpreting Biased Concepts in Online Communities
• Towards a multi-stakeholder value-based assessment framework for algorithmic systems
• On Heuristic Models, Assumptions, and Parameters