一句话:通过两项二次研究比较软件工程与人文科学对公平性的概念化,主张超越技术视角、面向社会情境理解公平。
背景:数字技术日益影响医疗、公共安全、娱乐与教育,软件工程主要通过算法公平性来回应伦理与政治关切。目标:挑战软件工程公平性方法的局限,分析人文科学如何概念化公平。方法:开展两项二次研究,分别分析软件工程中45篇算法公平性文章与人文领域25篇公平性文章,并比较其发现。结果:软件工程主要采用形式化与统计概念,关注结果分布;人文科学则强调历史情境、结构性不平等与权力关系,二者在社会效益、实践建议与挑战识别上也存在差异。结论:人文视角可促进情境化的公平理解,使软件工程超越纯技术方案,更好地考虑技术的社会影响。
Background. As digital technologies increasingly shape social domains such as healthcare, public safety, entertainment, and education, software engineering has engaged with ethical and political concerns primarily through the notion of algorithmic fairness. Aim. This study challenges the limits of software engineering approaches to fairness by analyzing how fairness is conceptualized in the human sciences. Methodology. We conducted two secondary studies, exploring 45 articles on algorithmic fairness in software engineering and 25 articles on fairness from the humanities, and compared their findings to assess cross-disciplinary insights for ethical technological development. Results. The analysis shows that software engineering predominantly defines fairness through formal and statistical notions focused on outcome distribution, whereas the humanities emphasize historically situated perspectives grounded in structural inequalities and power relations, with differences also evident in associated social benefits, proposed practices, and identified challenges. Conclusion. Perspectives from the human sciences can meaningfully contribute to software engineering by promoting situated understandings of fairness that move beyond technical approaches and better account for the societal impacts of technologies.