IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v18y2025i5p228-d1641302.html

Towards Fair AI: Mitigating Bias in Credit Decisions—A Systematic Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • José Rômulo de Castro Vieira

    (Department of Business Management, Faculty of Economics, Business Management, Accounting and Public Policy Management (FACE), University of Brasília, Brasília 70910-900, DF, Brazil)

  • Flavio Barboza

    (Faculty of Management and Business, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia 38408-100, MG, Brazil)

  • Daniel Cajueiro

    (Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics, Business Management, Accounting and Public Policy Management (FACE), University of Brasília, Brasília 70910-900, DF, Brazil)

  • Herbert Kimura

    (Department of Business Management, Faculty of Economics, Business Management, Accounting and Public Policy Management (FACE), University of Brasília, Brasília 70910-900, DF, Brazil)

Abstract

The increasing adoption of artificial intelligence algorithms is redefining decision-making across various industries. In the financial sector, where automated credit granting has undergone profound changes, this transformation raises concerns about biases perpetuated or introduced by AI systems. This study investigates the methods used to identify and mitigate biases in AI models applied to credit granting. We conducted a systematic literature review using the IEEE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct databases, covering the period from 1 January 2013 to 1 October 2024. From the 414 identified articles, 34 were selected for detailed analysis. Most studies are empirical and quantitative, focusing on fairness in outcomes and biases present in datasets. Preprocessing techniques dominated as the approach for bias mitigation, often relying on public academic datasets. Gender and race were the most studied sensitive attributes, with statistical parity being the most commonly used fairness metric. The findings reveal a maturing research landscape that prioritizes fairness in model outcomes and the mitigation of biases embedded in historical data. However, only a quarter of the papers report more than one fairness metric, limiting comparability across approaches. The literature remains largely focused on a narrow set of sensitive attributes, with little attention to intersectionality or alternative sources of bias. Furthermore, no study employed causal inference techniques to identify proxy discrimination. Despite some promising results—where fairness gains exceed 30% with minimal accuracy loss—significant methodological gaps persist, including the lack of standardized metrics, overreliance on legacy data, and insufficient transparency in model pipelines. Future work should prioritize developing advanced bias mitigation methods, exploring sensitive attributes, standardizing fairness metrics, improving model explainability, reducing computational complexity, enhancing synthetic data generation, and addressing the legal and ethical challenges of algorithms.

Suggested Citation

  • José Rômulo de Castro Vieira & Flavio Barboza & Daniel Cajueiro & Herbert Kimura, 2025. "Towards Fair AI: Mitigating Bias in Credit Decisions—A Systematic Literature Review," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-30, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:18:y:2025:i:5:p:228-:d:1641302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/18/5/228/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/18/5/228/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Teresa Bono & Karen Croxson & Adam Giles, 2021. "Algorithmic fairness in credit scoring," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 37(3), pages 585-617.
    2. Joseph L. Breeden & Eugenia Leonova, 2021. "Creating Unbiased Machine Learning Models by Design," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bogdan Mirea & Giani-Ionel Gradinaru, 2026. "Ethics and bias in AI: a potential challenge to fair economic progress," Romanian Journal of Economics, Institute of National Economy, vol. 62(1(71)), pages 99-110, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ana Belen Tulcanaza-Prieto & Alexandra Cortez-Ordoñez & Chang Won Lee, 2023. "Influence of Customer Perception Factors on AI-Enabled Customer Experience in the Ecuadorian Banking Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-22, August.
    2. Michel Grabisch & Antoine Mandel & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2025. "Efficiency versus fairness in link recommendation algorithms," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 25001, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    3. Christa Gibbs & Benedict Guttman-Kenney & Donghoon Lee & Scott Nelson & Wilbert van der Klaauw & Jialan Wang, 2025. "Consumer Credit Reporting Data," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 63(2), pages 598-636, June.
    4. Rosaria Cerrone, 2023. "Are Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Shaping a New Risk Management Approach?," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 16(12), pages 1-82, December.
    5. Darshan Pandya & Killol Govani, 2025. "The future of fintech in the UAE and KSA: a shift from convenience to business viability," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 52(1), pages 7-15, March.
    6. Christophe Hurlin & Christophe Pérignon & Sébastien Saurin, 2026. "The Fairness of Credit Scoring Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 406-425, January.
    7. Adam Bouyamourn & Alexander Williams Tolbert, 2025. "Escaping the Subprime Trap in Algorithmic Lending," Papers 2502.17816, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2025.
    8. Andrés Alonso & José Manuel Carbó, 2022. "Accuracy of explanations of machine learning models for credit decisions," Working Papers 2222, Banco de España.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:18:y:2025:i:5:p:228-:d:1641302. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.