Hidden Agents, Explicit Obligations: A Linguistic Analysis of AI Ethics Guidelines.

Since 2013, many organizations, governments, and coalitions have issued ethics guidelines aimed at achieving ethically sound artificial intelligence (AI). The literature evaluating these guidelines has so far focused more on what is in them (e.g., principles) than on who is expected to enact them (e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Science & Engineering Ethics Vol. 31; no. 6; pp. 1 - 23
Autores principales: Griffin, Tricia A., Goorman, Roos, Green, Brian P., Welie, Jos V. M.
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Dec2025
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=188950864&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 188950864
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        13533452
        GNI
      jtl: Science & Engineering Ethics
      issn: 13533452
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2025
      vid: 31
      iid: 6
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        188950864
        10.1007/s11948-025-00559-8
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 22
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 1.5MB
      tig:
        atl: Hidden Agents, Explicit Obligations: A Linguistic Analysis of AI Ethics Guidelines.
      aug:
        au:
          Griffin, Tricia A.
          Goorman, Roos
          Green, Brian P.
          Welie, Jos V. M.
        affil:
          https://ror.org/02jz4aj89 Faculty of Science and Engineering, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
          University College Maastricht, Zwingelput 4, 6211 KH, Maastricht, The Netherlands
          https://ror.org/03ypqe447 Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA, USA
          St. André International Center for Ethics and Integrity, Saint André d'Olérargues, France
      su:
        Moral agent (Philosophy)
        Computer software developers
        Ethics
        Linguistics
        Transitivity (Grammar)
        Artificial intelligence & ethics
        Normativity (Ethics)
        Change agents
        Standards
        Communication ethics
      sug:
        subj:
          Moral agent (Philosophy)
          Computer software developers
          Ethics
          Linguistics
          Transitivity (Grammar)
          Artificial intelligence & ethics
          Normativity (Ethics)
          Change agents
          Standards
          Communication ethics
      keyword:
        AI ethics
        Business ethics
        Ethical agency
        Ethics codes
        Ethics guidelines
        Moral agency
        Philosophy and Religious Studies Philosophy
        Writing ethics codes
      ab: Since 2013, many organizations, governments, and coalitions have issued ethics guidelines aimed at achieving ethically sound artificial intelligence (AI). The literature evaluating these guidelines has so far focused more on what is in them (e.g., principles) than on who is expected to enact them (e.g., developers). We argue that ethical agency in AI Ethics guidelines has been under-scrutinized in the literature, and we seek here to fill that gap. This study relies on transitivity analysis to evaluate 87 operational ethics guidelines for the representation of moral agents and their agency. We identified normative key words, their linguistic function, and agency attribution in 6,935 statements. Our findings reveal 11 distinct agents, with deployers, developers, and AI systems being the most frequently invoked. However, the ethical agency attributed to developers and deployers was overwhelmingly implied, while the tasks assigned to them were more often normative than descriptive. That the agency of the two most powerful agents in AI development is so often hidden in ethics guidelines reveals that the challenges associated with implementing AI ethics guidelines does not stem merely from the "principles to practice" problem, but from a more deeply rooted issue regarding how guideline authors conceive of ethical agency. We evaluate the findings through the dual lenses of agent backgrounding and agent suppression and conclude with advice for authors of ethics guidelines.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Science & Engineering Ethics is a copyright of Springer, 2025. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Science & Engineering Ethics
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2025
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N