The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Performativity of AI-powered Event Detection: How AI Creates a Racialized Protest and Why Looking for Bias Is Not a Solution
Open accessAbstract
This article builds a theoretical framework with which to confront the racializing capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI)-powered real-time Event Detection and Alert Creation (EDAC) software when used for protest detection. It is well-known that many AI-powered systems exacerbate social inequalities by racializing certain groups and individuals. We propose the feminist concept of performativity, as defined by Judith Butler and Karen Barad, as a more comprehensive way to expose and contest the harms wrought by EDAC than that of other “de-biasing” mechanisms. Our use of performativity differs from and complements other Social Studies of Science and Technology (STS) work because of its rigorous approach to how iterative, citational, and material practices produce the effect of race. We focus on Geofeedia and Dataminr, two EDAC companies that claim to be able to “predict” and “recognize” the emergence of dangerous protests, and show how their EDAC tools performatively produce the phenomena which they are supposed to observe. Specifically, we argue that this occurs because these companies and their stakeholders dictate the thresholds of (un)intelligibility, (ab)normality, and (un)certainty by which these tools operate and that this process is oriented toward the production of commercially actionable information.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“attempting to fix stereotypical associations and biases frequently overlooks how computer vision models are designed, produced, and evaluated in environments marked by coloniality”
From ‘We can see a savage’: a case study of the colonial gaze in generative AI algorithms (2026) · cites this paper as Drage and Frabetti 2024
Citations
Cites
Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective
Haraway, D. (1988) · Feminist Studies · doi:10.2307/3178066 · Cited by 18,364
Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of “Bias” in NLP
Blodgett, S. L., Barocas, S., Daumé III, H., & Wallach, H. (2020) · Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.485 · Cited by 1,050 · cited 4×
“In sum, our concept of performativity responds to socio-technical scholarship’s question of how social hierarchies, language ideologies, and AI systems are mutually constituted (Blodgett 2020) by explicitly detailing how these ideologies and discourses create and are recreated by technology.”
InfluentialTowards a critical race methodology in algorithmic fairness
Hanna, A., Denton, R., Smart, A., & Smith-Loud, J. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3351095.3372826 · Cited by 295 · cited 1×
“These attempts to pinpoint and extract the source of a system’s racism or sexism are of most value when they acknowledge that race and gender are both materially lived and socially constructed (Hanna et al. 2020).”
Social Biases in NLP Models as Barriers for Persons with Disabilities
Hutchinson, B., Prabhakaran, V., Denton, E., Webster, K., Zhong, Y., & Denuyl, S. (2020) · Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.487 · Cited by 274
Don’t ask if artificial intelligence is good or fair, ask how it shifts power
Kalluri, P. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-020-02003-2 · Cited by 213
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 33
- Amoore Louise, 2020, Cloud Ethics: Algorithms and the Attributes of Ourselves and Others
- 10.2307/j.ctv12101zq · DOI · Paper page
- Brockman John, 2019, Possible Minds: Twenty-five Ways of Looking at AI
- Browne Simone, 2015, On the Surveillance of Blackness
- Butler Judith, 1990, Gender Trouble
- Butler Judith, 1997, Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative
- 10.1086/448654 · DOI
- Carby Hazel, 1999, Cultures in Babylon: Black Britain and African America
- 10.7551/mitpress/14050.001.0001 · DOI
- 10.21428/96c8d426 · DOI
- 10.1177/20539517211044808 · DOI
- Derrida Jacques, 1990, Limited Inc
- Drage Eleanor, Feminist AI: Critical Perspectives on Algorithms, Data, and Intelligent Machines
- 10.1007/s13347-022-00543-1 · DOI
- Frabetti Federica, 2015, Software Theory: A Cultural and Philosophical Study
- 10.1017/S0003975615000107 · DOI
- hooks, bell, 1992, Black Looks. Race and Representation
- 10.1080/17530350.2010.494122 · DOI
- MacKenzie Donald, 2007, Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics
- 10.1007/s13347-020-00405-8 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/10714420701715415 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICETET-SIP-1946815.2019.9092299 · DOI
- Perdomo Juan C., Zrnic Tijana, Mendler-Dünner Celestine, Hardt Moritz. 2020. “Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning.” PMLR 119: 7599–609. Accessed March 14, 2023. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v119/perdomo20a.html
- 10.28968/cftt.v5i1.29586 · DOI · Paper page
- Scheuerman Morgan Klaus, 2019, ACM Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW, 144, 1
- 10.1177/20539517211053712 · DOI
- Scheuerman M. K., Wade K., Lustig C., Brubaker J. R. How we ve taught algorithms to see identity: Constructing race and gender in image databases for facial analysis. Proc. ACM Hum-Comput. Interact., 4(CSCW1), 2020. doi: 10.1145/3392866 · DOI · Paper page
- Seaver Nick, 2017, Big Data and Society, July–December, 1
- Stitzlein Sarah Marie, 2004, Electronic Journal of Science Education, 9
- Trewin Shari, 2018, ArXiv
- Varshney Lav R., Keskar Nitish Shirish, Socher Richard. 2019. “Pretrained AI Models: Performativity, Mobility, and Change.” Computers and Society. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1909.03290. · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s00146-019-00910-1 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11761-019-00265-x · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
‘We can see a savage’: a case study of the colonial gaze in generative AI algorithms
Alenichev, A., Shaffer, J. D., Kingori, P., Grietens, K. P., Muldoon, J., & Rocher, L. (2026) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-025-02685-0 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Drage, E., & Frabetti, F.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- University of Roehampton (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Frabetti, Federica
- Venue
- Science, Technology, & Human Values
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2023-03-27
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1045-1072
- ISSN
- 0162-2439 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8251
- OpenAlex
- W4361004889
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 3.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Science Technology & Human Values (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Funders
- Christina Gaw (Postdoctoral Research Grant)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Keywords
- racialization, performativity, algorithmic bias, feminist theory, Judith Butler, Karen Barad, bias mitigation, real-time alert system, social inequality
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