Cited by 60Ethics and Social Impacts of AIEthics in Business and EducationFlooding and Environmental Impact

Why Teaching Ethics to AI Practitioners Is Important

Open access
Goldsmith, Judy, Burton, Emanuelle·2017·Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

We argue that it is crucial to the future of AI that our students be trained in multiple complementary modes of ethical reasoning, so that they may make ethical design and implementation choices, ethical career decisions, and that their software will be programmed to take into account the complexities of acting ethically in the world.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/aaai.v31i1.11139

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • By and large very little to nothing has been written about the tangible implementation of ethical goals and values in AI.

    “So far, some papers have been published on the subject of teaching ethics to data scientists (Garzcarek and Steuer 2019; Burton etal. 2017; Goldsmith and Burton 2017; Johnson 2017) but by and large very little to nothing has been written about the tangible implementation of ethical goals and values.”

    From The Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines (2020) · cites this paper as Goldsmith and Burton 2017

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 10 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Alexander, L., and Moore, M. 2015. Deontological ethics. In Zalta, E. N., ed., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Spring 2015 edition.
  2. Aristotle. 1999. Nichomachean Ethics . Hackett. trans. Terence Irwin.
  3. Burton, E.; Goldsmith, J.; and Mattei, N. 2016. Using 'The Machine Stops' for teaching ethics in artificial intelligence and computer science. In AI & Ethics: Workshops at the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence .
  4. Driver, J. 2014. The history of utilitarianism. In Zalta, E. N., ed., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Winter 2014 edition.
  5. Rohlf, M. 2016. Immanuel kant. In Zalta, E. N., ed., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Spring 2016 edition.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goldsmith, J., & Burton, E.
Affiliations
University of Kentucky (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2017-02-12
Volume
31
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
  • 2374-3468
OpenAlex
W2604315161
Cited by
60
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6
FWCI
12.95
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • AAAI Publications (The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1646887)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Flooding and Environmental Impact
Keywords
ethics education, AI practitioners, moral reasoning, ethical design, AI ethics

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