What Makes an Image Tagger Fair?

Image analysis algorithms have been a boon to personalization in digital systems and are now widely available via easy-to-use APIs. However, it is important to ensure that they behave fairly in applications that involve processing images of people, such as dating apps. We conduct an experiment to shed light on the factors influencing the perception of "fairness." Participants are shown a photo along with two descriptions (human- and algorithm-generated). They are then asked to indicate which is "more fair" in the context of a dating site, and explain their reasoning. We vary a number of factors, including the gender, race and attractiveness of the person in the photo. While participants generally found human-generated tags to be more fair, API tags were judged as being more fair in one setting - where the image depicted an "attractive," white individual. In their explanations, participants often mention accuracy, as well as the objectivity/subjectivity of the tags in the description. We relate our work to the ongoing conversation about fairness in opaque tools like image tagging APIs, and their potential to result in harm.

[1]  Sean A. Munson,et al.  Unequal Representation and Gender Stereotypes in Image Search Results for Occupations , 2015, CHI.

[2]  Karrie Karahalios,et al.  Auditing Algorithms : Research Methods for Detecting Discrimination on Internet Platforms , 2014 .

[3]  Joshua Correll,et al.  The Chicago face database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data , 2015, Behavior research methods.

[4]  Jahna Otterbacher,et al.  Social B(eye)as: Human and Machine Descriptions of People Images , 2019, ICWSM.

[5]  Yizhou Sun,et al.  Design of reciprocal recommendation systems for online dating , 2016, Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[6]  J. Söderberg Media Technologies - Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society , 2014 .

[7]  Tony Doyle,et al.  Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy , 2017, Inf. Soc..

[8]  Harshit Kumar,et al.  Fairness In Reciprocal Recommendations: A Speed-Dating Study , 2018, UMAP.

[9]  James Gray,et al.  Facebook Photo Activity Associated with Body Image Disturbance in Adolescent Girls , 2014, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[10]  Jeremy P. Birnholtz,et al.  How People Form Folk Theories of Social Media Feeds and What it Means for How We Study Self-Presentation , 2018, CHI.

[11]  C. Moskowitz Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. , 2016 .

[12]  Nicholas Diakopoulos,et al.  Accountability in algorithmic decision making , 2016, Commun. ACM.

[13]  Judy Kay,et al.  Reciprocal recommender system for online dating , 2010, RecSys '10.

[14]  C. Ryff Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. , 1989 .

[15]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[16]  Judy Kay,et al.  Recommending people to people The nature of reciprocal recommenders with a case study in online dating , 2012 .

[17]  Annika Wærn,et al.  Towards Algorithmic Experience: Initial Efforts for Social Media Contexts , 2018, CHI.

[18]  Lauren Rhue,et al.  Racial Influence on Automated Perceptions of Emotions , 2018 .

[19]  Pablo J. Boczkowski,et al.  The Relevance of Algorithms , 2013 .

[20]  Leanne Chang,et al.  Follow me and like my beautiful selfies: Singapore teenage girls' engagement in self-presentation and peer comparison on social media , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[21]  Michele Willson,et al.  Algorithms (and the) everyday , 2017, The Social Power of Algorithms.

[22]  Jieyu Zhao,et al.  Men Also Like Shopping: Reducing Gender Bias Amplification using Corpus-level Constraints , 2017, EMNLP.

[23]  E HintonGeoffrey,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2017 .

[24]  Reuben Binns,et al.  Fairness in Machine Learning: Lessons from Political Philosophy , 2017, FAT.

[25]  Debra Mashek,et al.  The Self-Expansion Model of Motivation and Cognition in Close Relationships , 2013 .

[26]  K. Foot,et al.  Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society , 2014 .

[27]  Michael Stefanone,et al.  Contingencies of Self-Worth and Social-Networking-Site Behavior , 2011, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[28]  Timnit Gebru,et al.  Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification , 2018, FAT.

[29]  Rebecca J. Brand,et al.  What is beautiful is good, even online: Correlations between photo attractiveness and text attractiveness in men's online dating profiles , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..