Explanation needs and ethical demands: unpacking the instrumental value of XAI

Abstract The call for XAI rests on a normative claim: ‘Good AI is explainable AI’ or even the stronger claim: ‘Only explainable AI is good AI.’ However, this valorization runs the risk of being overgeneralized because explanations are not per se useful, appropriate, or demanded. Explainability should not be seen as a value in itself but as a means to certain ends. In this paper, we put the valorization of explainability into question, which is discursively connected to the idea of ‘users’ needs’ and the will to design and develop ethically aligned AI systems. By making the instrumental character of the value of explainability explicit, we address two key issues that necessitate more theoretical attention: (i) to analyze the link between explainability and its presumed purpose; and (ii) to clarify the conceptions of these presumed purposes, namely users’ needs and ethical principles XAI is meant to promote. From a philosophical and from a psychological perspective, we constructively criticize the undertheorized and undercomplex way of talking about ‘users’ needs’ and ethical demands. We plea to carefully differentiate the value of explainable AI in social contexts and signal further need for research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI and Ethics
Published
2024-12-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00622-3
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.78

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Explanation needs and ethical demands: unpacking the instrumental value of XAI

Ingrid Scharlau, Tobias Matzner, Suzana Alpsancar, Heike M. Buhl
8 citations
AI and Ethics
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2.78
article

Explanation needs and ethical demands: unpacking the instrumental value of XAI

Ingrid Scharlau, Tobias Matzner, Suzana Alpsancar, Heike M. Buhl
article en
8 citations

Abstract

Abstract The call for XAI rests on a normative claim: ‘Good AI is explainable AI’ or even the stronger claim: ‘Only explainable AI is good AI.’ However, this valorization runs the risk of being overgeneralized because explanations are not per se useful, appropriate, or demanded. Explainability should not be seen as a value in itself but as a means to certain ends. In this paper, we put the valorization of explainability into question, which is discursively connected to the idea of ‘users’ needs’ and the will to design and develop ethically aligned AI systems. By making the instrumental character of the value of explainability explicit, we address two key issues that necessitate more theoretical attention: (i) to analyze the link between explainability and its presumed purpose; and (ii) to clarify the conceptions of these presumed purposes, namely users’ needs and ethical principles XAI is meant to promote. From a philosophical and from a psychological perspective, we constructively criticize the undertheorized and undercomplex way of talking about ‘users’ needs’ and ethical demands. We plea to carefully differentiate the value of explainable AI in social contexts and signal further need for research.

AI and EthicsVol. 5(3)
Paderborn University (DE)
Universität Paderborn
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2.78
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.