Kowe Kadoma

Kowe Kadoma, Priyal Shrivastava, Mor Naaman

Researchers have demonstrated that Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) systems perform differently across demographic groups. In this work, we examined how subtitle errors affect evaluations of speakers and their content using a preregistered online experiment (N=207, U.S.-based crowdworkers). Participants watched speakers with various accents deliver a talk in which the subtitles were accurate or error-prone. Our results indicate that error-prone subtitles consistently reduce both speaker and content evaluations for all speakers. We did not see disparate impact between the accent groups, controlling for subtitle quality. Taken together, though, the findings of this short paper imply that speakers with accents for which ASR systems perform poorly are likely to be further penalized by viewers with lower evaluations.

Jay L. Cunningham, Adinawa Adjagbodjou, Jeffrey Basoah et al.

This scoping literature review examines how fairness, bias, and equity are conceptualized and operationalized in Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) and adjacent speech and language technologies (SLT) for African American English (AAE) speakers and other linguistically diverse communities. Drawing from 44 peer-reviewed publications across Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Machine Learning/Natural Language Processing (ML/NLP), and Sociolinguistics, we identify four major areas of inquiry: (1) how researchers understand ASR-related harms; (2) inclusive data practices spanning collection, curation, annotation, and model training; (3) methodological and theoretical approaches to linguistic inclusion; and (4) emerging practices and design recommendations for more equitable systems. While technical fairness interventions are growing, our review highlights a critical gap in governance-centered approaches that foreground community agency, linguistic justice, and participatory accountability. We propose a governance-centered ASR lifecycle as an emergent interdisciplinary framework for responsible ASR development and offer implications for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers seeking to address language marginalization in speech AI systems.

Inyoung Cheong, Alicia Guo, Mina Lee et al.

As AI integrates in various types of human writing, calls for transparency around AI assistance are growing. However, if transparency operates on uneven ground and certain identity groups bear a heavier cost for being honest, then the burden of openness becomes asymmetrical. This study investigates how AI disclosure statement affects perceptions of writing quality, and whether these effects vary by the author's race and gender. Through a large-scale controlled experiment, both human raters (n = 1,970) and LLM raters (n = 2,520) evaluated a single human-written news article while disclosure statements and author demographics were systematically varied. This approach reflects how both human and algorithmic decisions now influence access to opportunities (e.g., hiring, promotion) and social recognition (e.g., content recommendation algorithms). We find that both human and LLM raters consistently penalize disclosed AI use. However, only LLM raters exhibit demographic interaction effects: they favor articles attributed to women or Black authors when no disclosure is present. But these advantages disappear when AI assistance is revealed. These findings illuminate the complex relationships between AI disclosure and author identity, highlighting disparities between machine and human evaluation patterns.