CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 188Ethics and Social Impacts of AIImpact of AI and Big Data on Business and SocietyArtificial Intelligence Applications

REVIEWING THE ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF AI IN DECISION MAKING PROCESSES

Open access
Femi Osasona, Olukunle Oladipupo Amoo, Akoh Atadoga, Temitayo Oluwaseun Abrahams, Oluwatoyin Ajoke Farayola, Benjamin Samson Ayinla·2024·International Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship Research
DOI 10.51594/ijmer.v6i2.773
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has rapidly become an integral part of decision-making processes across various industries, revolutionizing the way choices are made. This Review delves into the ethical considerations associated with the use of AI in decision-making, exploring the implications of algorithms, automation, and machine learning. The incorporation of AI in decision-making introduces a myriad of ethical concerns that demand careful scrutiny. The opacity of algorithms raises questions about transparency, accountability, and bias. Decision-making processes driven by AI can be complex and difficult to interpret, leading to challenges in understanding how and why specific choices are made. As a result, ethical concerns emerge regarding the potential lack of transparency and accountability, especially when these decisions impact individuals or societal groups. Bias in AI algorithms poses a critical ethical challenge. Machine learning models learn from historical data, and if that data is biased, the AI system may perpetuate and even exacerbate existing biases. Addressing this challenge requires meticulous examination of training data, algorithmic design, and ongoing monitoring to ensure fairness and mitigate discrimination. The increased reliance on AI in decision-making processes also raises concerns about accountability and responsibility. When AI systems make decisions, determining who is ultimately responsible for those decisions becomes a complex ethical issue. Establishing a framework for accountability is crucial to ensure that individuals, organizations, and developers share responsibility for the outcomes of AI-driven decisions. Moreover, ethical considerations extend to the broader societal impact of AI in decision-making. Issues such as job displacement, economic inequality, and the potential concentration of power in the hands of a few require careful ethical examination. Striking a balance between technological advancement and social responsibility is paramount to ensuring that AI benefits society as a whole. In conclusion, this review highlights the ethical implications of integrating AI into decision-making processes. It underscores the need for transparency, fairness, and accountability to address concerns related to bias, responsibility, and the broader societal impact of AI-driven decisions. Ethical frameworks must evolve alongside technological advancements to foster a responsible and equitable integration of AI in decision-making processes. Keywords: Ethical, Implications, AI, Decision Making, Process.

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 · 10.51594/ijmer.v6i2.773

Cites

12 of 12 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?

  • AI-driven marketing brings efficiency and personalization, but at the cost of fragmenting the collective experience and potentially narrowing personal horizons.

    “It brings efficiency and personalization, but at the cost of fragmenting the collective experience and potentially narrowing personal horizons (Owolabi et al., 2024;Osasona et al., 2024;Oladoyinbo et al., 2024;Noranee & bin Othman, 2023).”

    From Surveillance Capitalism, Consumer Subjectivity and Marketing in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (2025) · cites this paper as Osasona et al., 2024

    The Introduction says AI can improve efficiency in decision-making across industries. It does not establish that AI-driven marketing provides personalization, fragments collective experience, or narrows personal horizons; searches for marketing, personalization, and those social effects found no supporting passage. The supplied copy has no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Ali, N. S. (2020). Non-Governmental Organizations and Their Role in Rural Community Development. Indian Journal of Ecology, 47, 368-372.
  2. Breidbach, C. F., & Maglio, P. (2020). Accountable algorithms? The ethical implications of data-driven business models. Journal of Service Management, 31(2), 163-185.
  3. Brendel, A. B., Mirbabaie, M., Lembcke, T. B., & Hofeditz, L. (2021). Ethical management of artificial intelligence. Sustainability, 13(4), 1974.
  4. Couture, V., Roy, M. C., Dez, E., Laperle, S., & Bélisle-Pipon, J. C. (2023). Ethical implications of artificial intelligence in population health and the public's role in its governance: perspectives from a citizen and expert panel. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, e44357.
  5. D. Urquhart, L., & J. Craigon, P. (2021). The Moral-IT Deck: a tool for ethics by design. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 8(1), 94-126.
  6. de Almeida, P. G. R., dos Santos, C. D., & Farias, J. S. (2021). Artificial intelligence regulation: a framework for governance. Ethics and Information Technology, 23(3), 505-525.
  7. Delgado, F., Yang, S., Madaio, M., & Yang, Q. (2021). Stakeholder Participation in AI: Beyond" Add Diverse Stakeholders and Stir. arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.01122. · arXiv
  8. Draude, C., Klumbyte, G., Lücking, P., & Treusch, P. (2020). Situated algorithms: a sociotechnical systemic approach to bias. Online Information Review, 44(2), 325-342.
  9. Du, S., & Xie, C. (2021). Paradoxes of artificial intelligence in consumer markets: Ethical challenges and opportunities. Journal of Business Research, 129, 961-974.
  10. Felzmann, H., Fosch-Villaronga, E., Lutz, C., & Tamò-Larrieux, A. (2020). Towards transparency by design for artificial intelligence. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(6), 3333-3361.
  11. Hassan, M. M., Lee, K. E., & Mokhtar, M. (2019). Streamlining non-governmental organizations' programs towards achieving the sustainable development goals: A conceptual framework. Sustainable Development, 27(3), 401-408.
  12. Hastuti, R. (2023). Ethical Considerations in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Balancing Innovation and Social Values. West Science Social and Humanities Studies, 1(02), 76- 87.
  13. Heilig, T., & Scheer, I. (2023). Decision Intelligence: Transform Your Team and Organization with AI-Driven Decision-Making. John Wiley & Sons.
  14. Kaur, D. (2023). Trustworthy AI: Ensuring Explainability & Acceptance (Doctoral dissertation).
  15. Kordzadeh, N., & Ghasemaghaei, M. (2022). Algorithmic bias: review, synthesis, and future research directions. European Journal of Information Systems, 31(3), 388-409.
  16. Laux, J., Wachter, S., & Mittelstadt, B. (2024). Trustworthy artificial intelligence and the European Union AI act: On the conflation of trustworthiness and acceptability of risk. Regulation & Governance, 18(1), 3-32.
  17. Lebovitz, S., Levina, N., & Lifshitz-Assaf, H. (2021). Is AI ground truth really true? The dangers of training and evaluating AI tools based on experts'know-what. MIS Quarterly, 45(3).
  18. Lee, D., & Yoon, S. N. (2021). Application of artificial intelligence-based technologies in the healthcare industry: Opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(1), 271.
  19. Lindebaum, D., Vesa, M., & Den Hond, F. (2020). Insights from "the machine stops" to better understand rational assumptions in algorithmic decision making and its implications for organizations. Academy of Management Review, 45(1), 247-263.
  20. London, A. J. (2019). Artificial intelligence and black-box medical decisions: accuracy versus explainability. Hastings Center Report, 49(1), 15-21.
  21. Mohseni, S., Zarei, N., & Ragan, E. D. (2021). A multidisciplinary survey and framework for design and evaluation of explainable AI systems. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS), 11(3-4), 1-45.
  22. Moser, C., den Hond, F., & Lindebaum, D. (2022). Morality in the age of artificially intelligent algorithms. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 21(1), 139-155.
  23. Nassar, A., & Kamal, M. (2021). Ethical dilemmas in AI-powered decision-making: a deep dive into big data-driven ethical considerations. International Journal of Responsible Artificial Intelligence, 11(8), 1-11.
  24. Nersessian, D., & Mancha, R. (2020). From automation to autonomy: legal and ethical responsibility gaps in artificial intelligence innovation. Michigan Technology Law Review, 27, 55.
  25. Ntoutsi, E., Fafalios, P., Gadiraju, U., Iosifidis, V., Nejdl, W., Vidal, M. E., ... & Staab, S. (2020). Bias in data-driven artificial intelligence systems-An introductory survey. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 10(3), e1356.
  26. Patel, K. (2024). Ethical reflections on data-centric AI: balancing benefits and risks. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research and Development, 2(1), 1-17.
  27. Rahman, A. (2023). AI revolution: shaping industries through artificial intelligence and machine learning. Journal Environmental Sciences and Technology, 2(1), 93-105.
  28. Schoenefeld, J. J. (2021). Interest groups, NGOs or civil society organisations? The framing of non-state actors in the EU. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 32(3), 585-596.
  29. Schultz, M. D., & Seele, P. (2023). Towards AI ethics' institutionalization: knowledge bridges from business ethics to advance organizational AI ethics. AI and Ethics, 3(1), 99-111.
  30. Sin, J., L. Franz, R., Munteanu, C., & Barbosa Neves, B. (2021, May). Digital design marginalization: New perspectives on designing inclusive interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-11).
  31. Stahl, B. C. (2021). Artificial intelligence for a better future: an ecosystem perspective on the ethics of AI and emerging digital technologies (p. 124). Springer Nature.
  32. Susser, D. (2019, January). Invisible influence: Artificial intelligence and the ethics of adaptive choice architectures. In Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (pp. 403-408).
  33. Taeihagh, A. (2021). Governance of artificial intelligence. Policy and Society, 40(2), 137-157.
  34. Vecchione, B., Levy, K., & Barocas, S. (2021). Algorithmic auditing and social justice: Lessons from the history of audit studies. In Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization (pp. 1-9).
  35. Von Eschenbach, W. J. (2021). Transparency and the black box problem: Why we do not trust AI. Philosophy & Technology, 34(4), 1607-1622.
  36. Yarger, L., Cobb Payton, F., & Neupane, B. (2020). Algorithmic equity in the hiring of underrepresented IT job candidates. Online Information Review, 44(2), 383-395.
  37. Yazdanpanah, V., Gerding, E. H., Stein, S., Dastani, M., Jonker, C. M., Norman, T. J., & Ramchurn, S. D. (2023). Reasoning about responsibility in autonomous systems: challenges and opportunities. AI & Society, 38(4), 1453-1464.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Osasona, F., Amoo, O. O., Atadoga, A., Abrahams, T. O., Farayola, O. A., & Ayinla, B. S.
Affiliations
  • Scottish Water (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • University of Nebraska at Omaha (US)
  • The University of Texas at Dallas (US)
  • The University of Law (GB)
Venue
International Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship Research
Publisher
Fair East Publishers
Published
2024-02-13
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
322-335
ISSN
  • 2664-3588 (ISSN-L)
  • 2664-3596
DOI
10.51594/ijmer.v6i2.773
OpenAlex
W4391898528
Cited by
188
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 97 · 2024: 47
FWCI
78.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
International Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Impact of AI and Big Data on Business and Society
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
AI ethics, AI decision-making, algorithmic bias, algorithmic transparency, accountability, algorithmic fairness, job displacement, economic inequality, concentration of power, ethical frameworks, machine learning

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