Claims

AI ethics principles alone do not enforce regulation, per the article's review of implementation evidence

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r? · q1
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q1 i? Reviews of technology-industry implementation found scarce evidence that ethics principles change organisational behaviour; principles alone do not enforce regulation. → Teresa Swist 2024

Evidence

Teresa Swist 2024

Teresa Swist, Simon Buckingham Shum, Kalervo N. Gulson. (2024). Co-producing AIED Ethics Under Lockdown: an Empirical Study of Deliberative Democracy in Action. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 34:670–705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-023-00380-z

q1 · i? · qualitative · r?

Background review section: the article reports, citing Whittaker et al. (2018), that evidence of ethics principles' impact on computing companies' behaviour was scarce, and that ethics principles alone do not enforce regulation; the review offers no new data.

"concluded that the evidence of their impact on the behaviour of computing companies was scarce"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id ethics-principles-alone-insufficient
title AI ethics principles alone do not enforce regulation, per the article's review of implementation evidence
description AI ethics principles alone do not enforce regulation, per the article's review of implementation evidence
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2024
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-28
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — teresa-swist-2024

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.