Fairness perceptions of AI use by tax administration

DOI

We tested whether the proportion of AI versus auditors in fraud selection matters for fairness, and whether there is an impact of transparency (explanations). We found that a higher proportion of AI was more procedurally fair, mostly through bias suppression and consistency, and that the attitude toward AI and trust in the administration explained most variance. Transparency (explanations) had no impact. We also found two small negative interaction effects concerning trust and procedural fairness: with high trust in the tax administration, fairness increased less (as AI increased). Conversely, with low trust, fairness increased more (as AI increased). Dataset 1 was used for the pilot (with students and professionals) Dataset 2 was a representative dataset for the Flemish population.

Sample 1: Convenience sample Sample 2: Convenience sample drawn from their database with 100,000 participants

Online survey

Identifier
DOI https://doi.org/10.34934/DVN/1NHGXH
Metadata Access https://datacatalogue.cessda.eu/oai-pmh/v0/oai?verb=GetRecord&metadataPrefix=oai_ddi25&identifier=d2ac93fad170a8822f82cb65a248e9b266fc91c7e4e4adf8ca5a4ecc5ea895fa
Provenance
Creator Decuypere, Anouk; Anne Van de Vijver
Publisher Social Sciences and Digital Humanities Archive – SODHA
Publication Year 2024
OpenAccess true
Representation
Resource Type Survey data
Discipline Agriculture, Forestry, Horticulture, Aquaculture; Agriculture, Forestry, Horticulture, Aquaculture and Veterinary Medicine; Life Sciences; Social Sciences; Social and Behavioural Sciences; Soil Sciences