IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dar/wpaper/153713.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Elevating Developers' Accountability Awareness in AI Systems Development : The Role of Process and Outcome Accountability Arguments

Author

Listed:
  • Schmidt, Jan-Hendrik
  • Bartsch, Sebastian Clemens
  • Adam, Martin
  • Benlian, Alexander

Abstract

The increasing proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) systems presents new challenges for the future of information systems (IS) development, especially in terms of holding stakeholders accountable for the development and impacts of AI systems. However, current governance tools and methods in IS development, such as AI principles or audits, are often criticized for their ineffectiveness in influencing AI developers’ attitudes and perceptions. Drawing on construal level theory and Toulmin’s model of argumentation, this paper employed a sequential mixed method approach to integrate insights from a randomized online experiment (Study 1) and qualitative interviews (Study 2). This combined approach helped us investigate how different types of accountability arguments affect AI developers’ accountability perceptions. In the online experiment, process accountability arguments were found to be more effective than outcome accountability arguments in enhancing AI developers’ perceived accountability. However, when supported by evidence, both types of accountability arguments prove to be similarly effective. The qualitative study corroborates and complements the quantitative study’s conclusions, revealing that process and outcome accountability emerge as distinct theoretical constructs in AI systems development. The interviews also highlight critical organizational and individual boundary conditions that shape how AI developers perceive their accountability. Together, the results contribute to IS research on algorithmic accountability and IS development by revealing the distinct nature of process and outcome accountability while demonstrating the effectiveness of tailored arguments as governance tools and methods in AI systems development.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmidt, Jan-Hendrik & Bartsch, Sebastian Clemens & Adam, Martin & Benlian, Alexander, 2025. "Elevating Developers' Accountability Awareness in AI Systems Development : The Role of Process and Outcome Accountability Arguments," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 153713, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    • Handle: RePEc:dar:wpaper:153713
    DOI: 10.1007/s12599-024-00914-2
    Note: for complete metadata visit http://tubiblio.ulb.tu-darmstadt.de/153713/
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://tuprints.ulb.tu-darmstadt.de/29644
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-024-00914-2
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12599-024-00914-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zsófia Tóth & Robert Caruana & Thorsten Gruber & Claudia Loebbecke, 2022. "The Dawn of the AI Robots: Towards a New Framework of AI Robot Accountability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(4), pages 895-916, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Arsenyan, Jbid & Mirowska, Agata & Piepenbrink, Anke, 2023. "Close encounters with the virtual kind: Defining a human-virtual agent coexistence framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    2. Jan-Hendrik Schmidt & Sebastian Clemens Bartsch & Martin Adam & Alexander Benlian, 2025. "Elevating Developers’ Accountability Awareness in AI Systems Development," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 67(1), pages 109-135, February.
    3. Esmat Zaidan & Imad Antoine Ibrahim, 2024. "AI Governance in a Complex and Rapidly Changing Regulatory Landscape: A Global Perspective," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Michael Haenlein & Ming-Hui Huang & Andreas Kaplan, 2022. "Guest Editorial: Business Ethics in the Era of Artificial Intelligence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(4), pages 867-869, July.
    5. repec:dar:wpaper:151909 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Benjamin Mueller, 2022. "Corporate Digital Responsibility," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 64(5), pages 689-700, October.
    7. Anton Klarin & Hossein Ali Abadi & Rifat Sharmelly, 2024. "Professionalism in artificial intelligence: The link between technology and ethics," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 557-580, July.
    8. Yuhong Gao & Thierry Blayac & Marc Willinger, 2025. "Delegating Moral Dilemmas in Autonomous Vehicles Evidence from an online experiment in China," Post-Print hal-05058037, HAL.
    9. Paul Kofman, 2025. "Scoring the Ethics of AI Robo-Advice: Why We Need Gateways and Ratings," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 198(1), pages 21-33, April.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:dar:wpaper:153713. 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: Dekanatssekretariat (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ivthdde.html .

    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.