Cited by 13Ethics and Social Impacts of AICybernetics and Technology in SocietyMisinformation and Its Impacts

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 access
Drage, Eleanor, Frabetti, Federica·2024·Science, Technology, & Human Values

Abstract

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

Crossref · 10.1177/01622439231164660

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Amoore Louise, 2020, Cloud Ethics: Algorithms and the Attributes of Ourselves and Others
  2. 10.2307/j.ctv12101zq · DOI · Paper page
  3. Brockman John, 2019, Possible Minds: Twenty-five Ways of Looking at AI
  4. Browne Simone, 2015, On the Surveillance of Blackness
  5. Butler Judith, 1990, Gender Trouble
  6. Butler Judith, 1997, Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative
  7. 10.1086/448654 · DOI
  8. Carby Hazel, 1999, Cultures in Babylon: Black Britain and African America
  9. 10.7551/mitpress/14050.001.0001 · DOI
  10. 10.21428/96c8d426 · DOI
  11. 10.1177/20539517211044808 · DOI
  12. Derrida Jacques, 1990, Limited Inc
  13. Drage Eleanor, Feminist AI: Critical Perspectives on Algorithms, Data, and Intelligent Machines
  14. 10.1007/s13347-022-00543-1 · DOI
  15. Frabetti Federica, 2015, Software Theory: A Cultural and Philosophical Study
  16. 10.1017/S0003975615000107 · DOI
  17. hooks, bell, 1992, Black Looks. Race and Representation
  18. 10.1080/17530350.2010.494122 · DOI
  19. MacKenzie Donald, 2007, Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics
  20. 10.1007/s13347-020-00405-8 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1080/10714420701715415 · DOI
  22. 10.1109/ICETET-SIP-1946815.2019.9092299 · DOI
  23. 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
  24. 10.28968/cftt.v5i1.29586 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Scheuerman Morgan Klaus, 2019, ACM Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW, 144, 1
  26. 10.1177/20539517211053712 · DOI
  27. 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
  28. Seaver Nick, 2017, Big Data and Society, July–December, 1
  29. Stitzlein Sarah Marie, 2004, Electronic Journal of Science Education, 9
  30. Trewin Shari, 2018, ArXiv
  31. 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
  32. 10.1007/s00146-019-00910-1 · DOI
  33. 10.1007/s11761-019-00265-x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 13

Metadata

Authors
Drage, E., & Frabetti, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • University of Roehampton (GB)
Corresponding author
Frabetti, Federica
Venue
Science, Technology, & Human Values
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
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