Papers › Whose Preferences? Differences in Fairness Preferences and Their Impact on the...

Whose Preferences? Differences in Fairness Preferences and Their Impact on the Fairness of AI Utilizing Human Feedback

9 Jun 2024arXiv:2406.05902archive 2025-07-28

Emilia Agis Lerner, Florian E. Dorner, Elliott Ash, Naman Goel

There is a growing body of work on learning from human feedback to align various aspects of machine learning systems with human values and preferences. We consider the setting of fairness in content moderation, in which human feedback is used to determine how two comments -- referencing different sensitive attribute groups -- should be treated in comparison to one another. With a novel dataset collected from Prolific and MTurk, we find significant gaps in fairness preferences depending on the race, age, political stance, educational level, and LGBTQ+ identity of annotators. We also demonstrate that demographics mentioned in text have a strong influence on how users perceive individual fairness in moderation. Further, we find that differences also exist in downstream classifiers trained to predict human preferences. Finally, we observe that an ensemble, giving equal weight to classifiers trained on annotations from different demographics, performs better for different demographic intersections; compared to a single classifier that gives equal weight to each annotation.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

AttributeFairness

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

ALIGN

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections