To Trust, or Not to Trust? A Study of Human Bias in Automated Video Interview Assessments

November 27, 2019 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Chee Wee Leong, Katrina Roohr, Vikram Ramanarayanan, Michelle P. Martin-Raugh, Harrison Kell, Rutuja Ubale, Yao Qian, Zydrune Mladineo, Laura McCulla arXiv ID 1911.13248 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Cross-listed cs.LG Citations 14 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Supervised systems require human labels for training. But, are humans themselves always impartial during the annotation process? We examine this question in the context of automated assessment of human behavioral tasks. Specifically, we investigate whether human ratings themselves can be trusted at their face value when scoring video-based structured interviews, and whether such ratings can impact machine learning models that use them as training data. We present preliminary empirical evidence that indicates there might be biases in such annotations, most of which are visual in nature.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Human-Computer Interaction

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted