Bias in the Machine: How Artificial Intelligence Reinforces Inequality for Minority Communities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58445/rars.3431Keywords:
AI, algorithmic bias, bias datasetsAbstract
In the contemporary digital landscape, artificial intelligence has become deeply embedded in systems that govern employment, education, healthcare, and social interaction. However, despite the perception of AI as objective and neutral, mounting evidence reveals that these systems frequently perpetuate and amplify existing social prejudices against racial and ethnic minorities. Biased training datasets, lack of diversity in development teams, and insufficient algorithmic transparency combine to create technologies that systematically disadvantage minority populations. These groups experience discriminatory outcomes in automated hiring processes, educational assessment tools, healthcare diagnostic systems, and social media platforms as a result of algorithmic bias rooted in historical inequities. The challenges faced by minority communities in the age of AI are not isolated incidents but rather reflect broader structural problems within the technology industry and society at large. Comprehensive interventions that address dataset diversity, development team composition, and regulatory oversight are essential to bridge this algorithmic equity gap and ensure fair treatment for all individuals in an increasingly AI-driven world.
References
AI Now Institute. (2023). Discriminating systems: Gender, race, and power in AI. New York University. https://ainowinstitute.org/discriminatingsystems.html
American Academy of Dermatology. (2023). Bias in dermatology AI diagnostic tools. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 88(3), 612-620.
Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2020). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination in the age of AI. American Economic Review, 110(4), 991-1013.
Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender Shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 81, 1-15.
Chen, J., Kim, S., & Rodriguez, M. (2021). Accent bias in AI-powered video interview platforms. ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency.
Chen, L., & Wei, S. (2023). Algorithmic tracking in adaptive learning systems: Evidence of racial bias. University of California Education Research Quarterly, 45(2), 234-251.
Crawford, K. (2021). Atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. Yale University Press.
European Commission. (2024). The AI Act: Europe's regulatory framework for artificial intelligence. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/regulatory-framework-ai
Health Affairs. (2023). Racial disparities in AI-mediated healthcare referrals. Health Affairs, 42(6), 778-786.
Indigenous Digital Rights Coalition. (2022). Algorithmic marginalization of Native American content creators. Digital Rights Quarterly, 8(4), 112-125.
Journal of the American Medical Association. (2022). Diagnostic accuracy disparities in clinical AI systems across racial groups. JAMA, 327(18), 1804-1812.
Linguistic Society of America. (2023). Bias in automated writing assessment against African American Vernacular English. Language Assessment Quarterly, 20(1), 45-63.
MIT Media Lab. (2022). The impact of team diversity on AI fairness outcomes. MIT Technology Review Research Report.
MIT Technology Review. (2023). The state of AI in hiring: 2023 industry survey. https://www.technologyreview.com/ai-hiring-survey
National Bureau of Economic Research. (2022). Algorithmic discrimination in tech sector hiring. NBER Working Paper 29847.
National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2021). Face recognition vendor test: Demographic effects. NIST Interagency Report 8280.
National Kidney Foundation. (2022). Racial bias in eGFR calculations and kidney disease management. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 79(5), 642-650.
New England Journal of Medicine. (2021). Racial bias in pulse oximetry measurement. New England Journal of Medicine, 383(25), 2477-2478.
Obermeyer, Z., Powers, B., Vogeli, C., & Mullainathan, S. (2019). Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science, 366(6464), 447-453.
Partnership on AI. (2023). Transparency in algorithmic decision-making: 2023 benchmarking study. https://partnershiponai.org/transparency-report
Pew Research Center. (2023). Experiences with algorithmic bias on social media platforms. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/algorithmic-bias/
Social Media Collective. (2023). Algorithmic amplification disparities across racial groups. Research & Politics, 10(2), 1-9.
Stanford Center for Ethics in Society. (2022). Bias in AI-based writing detection tools. Stanford University Digital Ethics Report.
Stanford Internet Observatory. (2022). Algorithmic stereotyping in content recommendation systems. Stanford Digital Repository.
Downloads
Posted
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jiya Li

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.