Responsibility and Accountability in an Algorithmic Society

This paper articulates the importance of distinguishing responsibility practices from accountability frameworks for the design, development, and deployment of algorithmic decision-making systems. Accountability frameworks are organized social systems associated with particular groups or institutions that employ rule-governed practices to incentivize or sanction specific behaviors. In contrast, responsibility practices concern our everyday notions of praise and blame, which vary across different contexts and institutions. There is widespread recognition that algorithmic decision-making systems raise special questions about how to attribute moral responsibility and hold individuals accountable. However, scholars often overlook the importance of distinguishing these things. We argue for the value of recognizing that accountability practices and responsibility practices are distinct. Moreover, we argue that accountability frameworks can offer morally important benefits that cannot be obtained through ordinary moral responsibility practices. That is, there are often good moral reasons for organizations to implement accountability practices in their internal rules. This justifies some current practices, but also provides an argument for the value of developing and implementing accountability practices within an organization.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy & Technology
Published
2025-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-025-00970-w
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.10
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Responsibility and Accountability in an Algorithmic Society

Will Fleisher, Vance Ricks, John Basl, Matthew Noah Smith et al.
3 citations
Philosophy & Technology
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
7.10
article

Responsibility and Accountability in an Algorithmic Society

Will Fleisher, Vance Ricks, John Basl, Matthew Noah Smith, Beba Cibralic
article en
3 citations

Abstract

This paper articulates the importance of distinguishing responsibility practices from accountability frameworks for the design, development, and deployment of algorithmic decision-making systems. Accountability frameworks are organized social systems associated with particular groups or institutions that employ rule-governed practices to incentivize or sanction specific behaviors. In contrast, responsibility practices concern our everyday notions of praise and blame, which vary across different contexts and institutions. There is widespread recognition that algorithmic decision-making systems raise special questions about how to attribute moral responsibility and hold individuals accountable. However, scholars often overlook the importance of distinguishing these things. We argue for the value of recognizing that accountability practices and responsibility practices are distinct. Moreover, we argue that accountability frameworks can offer morally important benefits that cannot be obtained through ordinary moral responsibility practices. That is, there are often good moral reasons for organizations to implement accountability practices in their internal rules. This justifies some current practices, but also provides an argument for the value of developing and implementing accountability practices within an organization.

Philosophy & TechnologyVol. 38(4)
Northeastern University (US), Georgetown University (US), University of Cambridge (GB), Georgetown University Medical Center (US), Leverhulme Trust (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
7.10
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.