Scoping Fairness Objectives and Identifying Fairness Metrics for Recommender Systems: The Practitioners' Perspective
Jessie J. Smith, Lex Beattie, Henriette Cramer
Abstract
Measuring and assessing the impact and “fairness’’ of recommendation algorithms is central to responsible recommendation efforts. However, the complexity of fairness definitions and the proliferation of fairness metrics in research literature have led to a complex decision-making space. This environment makes it challenging for practitioners to operationalize and pick metrics that work within their unique context. This suggests that practitioners require more decision-making support, but it is not clear what type of support would be beneficial. We conducted a literature review of 24 papers to gather metrics introduced by the research community for measuring fairness in recommendation and ranking systems. We organized these metrics into a ‘decision-tree style’ support framework designed to help practitioners scope fairness objectives and identify fairness metrics relevant to their recommendation domain and application context. To explore the feasibility of this approach, we conducted 15 semi-structured interviews using this framework to assess which challenges practitioners may face when scoping fairness objectives and metrics for their system, and which further support may be needed beyond such tools.
Ask about this paper
Ask your agent about it.
Lune has read the top-tier papers around this one, so every answer names the papers it rests on.
Cited by top-tier papers4
- Filtering Discomforting Recommendations with Large Language ModelsJiahao Liu, Yiyang Shao, Peng Zhang, Dongsheng Li et al.WWW 2025 · 8 citations
- Can We Trust Recommender System Fairness Evaluation? The Role of Fairness and RelevanceTheresia Veronika Rampisela, Tuukka Ruotsalo, Maria Maistro, Christina LiomaSIGIR 2024 · 6 citations
- Organization Matters: A Qualitative Study of Organizational Dynamics in Red Teaming Practices For Generative AIBixuan Ren, Eunjeong Cheon, Jianghui LiCSCW 2025 · 3 citations
- Fairness-in-the-Workflow: How Machine Learning Practitioners at Big Tech Companies Approach Fairness in Recommender SystemsJing Nathan Yan, Emma Harvey, Junxiong Wang, Jeffrey M. Rzeszotarski et al.CHI 2026
Related papers
- Towards Fairness in Practice: A Practitioner-Oriented Rubric for Evaluating Fair ML ToolkitsBrianna Richardson, Jean Garcia-Gathright, Samuel F. Way, Jennifer Thom et al.CHI 2021 · 56 citations
- FairRankVis: A Visual Analytics Framework for Exploring Algorithmic Fairness in Graph Mining ModelsTiankai Xie, Yuxin Ma, Jian Kang, Hanghang Tong et al.IEEE VIS 2021 · 30 citations
- The Landscape and Gaps in Open Source Fairness ToolkitsMichelle Seng Ah Lee, Jatinder SinghCHI 2021 · 117 citations
- Fairness Evaluation in Text Classification: Machine Learning Practitioner Perspectives of Individual and Group FairnessZahra Ashktorab, Benjamin Hoover, Mayank Agarwal, Casey Dugan et al.CHI 2023 · 13 citations
- Joint Evaluation of Fairness and Relevance in Recommender Systems with Pareto FrontierTheresia Veronika Rampisela, Tuukka Ruotsalo, Maria Maistro, Christina LiomaWWW 2025 · 3 citations
