CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 288Ethics and Social Impacts of AINames, Identity, and Discrimination ResearchDiscrimination and Equality Law

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 442 of the 442 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A multidisciplinary survey on discrimination analysis

Romei, Andrea, Ruggieri, Salvatore·2014·The Knowledge Engineering Review
DOI 10.1017/s0269888913000039
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The collection and analysis of observational and experimental data represent the main tools for assessing the presence, the extent, the nature, and the trend of discrimination phenomena. Data analysis techniques have been proposed in the last 50 years in the economic, legal, statistical, and, recently, in the data mining literature. This is not surprising, since discrimination analysis is a multidisciplinary problem, involving sociological causes, legal argumentations, economic models, statistical techniques, and computational issues. The objective of this survey is to provide a guidance and a glue for researchers and anti-discrimination data analysts on concepts, problems, application areas, datasets, methods, and approaches from a multidisciplinary perspective. We organize the approaches according to their method of data collection as observational, quasi-experimental, and experimental studies. A fourth line of recently blooming research on knowledge discovery based methods is also covered. Observational methods are further categorized on the basis of their application context: labor economics, social profiling, consumer markets, and others.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0269888913000039

Cites

442 of 442 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Items 201–400 of 442

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. Ghosh, 2000, Hierarchical Bayesian analysis of binary matched data, Statistica Sinica, 10, 647
  2. Armstrong, 2006, Proceedings of World Congress on Advances in Economics and Econometrics Theory and Applications, 1
  3. Gastwirth, 1992, Methods for assessing the sensitivity of statistical comparisons used in Title VII cases to omitted variables, Jurimetrics Journal, 33, 19
  4. Ding, 2008, Neighborhood patterns of high-cost lending: the case of Atlanta, Journal of Affordable Housing, 17, 194
  5. Clifton C. 2003. Privacy preserving data mining: How do we mine data when we aren't allowed to see it? In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD 2003), Tutorial, Washington, DC, USA. http://www.cs.purdue.edu.
  6. Charness, 2011, Handbook of Labor Economics, 229, 10.1016/S0169-7218(11)00409-6 · DOI
  7. Blank, 2004, Measuring Racial Discrimination – Panel on Methods for Assessing Discrimination
  8. Fix, 1999, A National Report Card on Discrimination in America: The Role of Testing
  9. 2007, Science, Technology and Gender: An International Report
  10. Heckman, 1993, Clear and Convincing Evidence: Measures of discrimination in America, 187
  11. Greene, 2008, Econometric Analysis
  12. Hoeting, 1999, Bayesian model averaging: a tutorial, Statistical Science, 14, 382
  13. Ross, 1999, Mortgage lending discrimination: A review of existing evidence, 107
  14. Paetzold, 1994, The Statistics of Discrimination: Using Statistical Evidence in Discrimination Cases
  15. Körffer, 2008, Profiling the European Citizen: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, 201
  16. 10.1023/A:1008616203852 · DOI
  17. Leopold, 2008, Profiling the European Citizen: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, 236
  18. Scheinkman, 2008, The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics
  19. Longhofer, 1999, Why is mortgage discrimination illegal? A fresh look at the mortgage discrimination debate, Regulation, Cato Institute, 22, 28
  20. Fienberg, 1995, Understanding and evaluating statistical evidence in litigation, Jurimetrics Journal of Law, Science, and Technology, 36, 1
  21. Lee, 2009, American Idol: evidence on same-race preferences, The Berkeley Electronic Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy, 9
  22. 10.1353/jhr.2011.0025 · DOI
  23. Rachlis, 1993, Serious flaws in statistical tests for discrimination in mortgage markets, Journal of Housing Research, 2, 315
  24. Ross, 1997, Mortgage lending discrimination and racial differences in loan default: a simulation approach, Journal of Housing Research, 8, 277
  25. Ellis, 2005, EU Anti-Discrimination Law
  26. Shoben, 1992, Statistical Methods in Discrimination Litigation, 55

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 288

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Romei, A., & Ruggieri, S.
Affiliations
University of Pisa (IT)
ORCID
Venue
The Knowledge Engineering Review
Publisher
Maximum Academic Press
Published
2013-04-03
Volume
29
Issue
5
Pages
582-638
ISSN
  • 0269-8889 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8005
DOI
10.1017/s0269888913000039
OpenAlex
W2166454173
Semantic Scholar
b0d3968e7a630d3661cd0878acc38c85f1828a9c
Cited by
288
References
442
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3
FWCI
29.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
  • The Knowledge Engineering Review (publishedVersion)
  • UnipiEprints Open Archive (Università di Pisa) (acceptedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa) (submittedVersion)
  • ISTI Open Portal (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
  • Social Sciences › Law › Discrimination and Equality Law
Keywords
discrimination analysis, anti-discrimination, observational studies, quasi-experimental design, experimental study, knowledge discovery, labor economics, social profiling, consumer market

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review