Deprogramming Implicit Bias
The Case for Public Interest Technology
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9685385 |
|---|---|
| Authors | D Walker (0000-0002-9369-6953, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 153 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 268-275 |
| Publication date | 2024-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Daedalus (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0011-5266 • E-ISSN: 1548-6192 |
| Publisher | MIT Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1162/daed_a_02059 |
| OpenAlex | W4392543512 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 2 |
New technologies have fundamentally transformed the systems that govern modern life, from criminal justice to health care, housing, and beyond. Algorithmic advancements promise greater efficiency and purported objectivity, but they risk perpetuating dangerous biases. In response, the field of public interest technology has emerged to offer an interdisciplinary, human-centered, and equity-focused approach to technological innovation. This essay argues for the widespread adoption of public interest technology principles, including thinking critically about how and when technological solutions are deployed, adopting rigorous training to educate technologists on ethical and social context, and prioritizing the knowledge and experiences of communities facing the disproportionate harms or uneven benefits of technology. Tools being designed and deployed today will shape our collective future, and collaboration between philanthropy, government, storytellers, activists, and private-sector technologists is essential in ensuring that these new systems are as just as they are innovative
Economics · Political science · Positive economics · Public interest · Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Legal and Constitutional Studies
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2,5 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |