Ethics and Artificial Intelligence: exploring scientific field indicators
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26512/rici.v19.n1.2026.57464Keywords:
Indicators, Information ethics, Artificial intelligenceAbstract
The article maps the scientific production on ethics and artificial intelligence (AI) through bibliometric indicators, analyzing trends and the current state of the field. Using the Scopus database, due to its broad coverage and quality of metadata, the research followed a specific search strategy to collect and analyze the data. The results indicate a significant growth in publications on ethics and AI, with emphasis on the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Finland. However, there is low representation of countries in Latin America, Africa, and Central Asia. The bibliometric analysis shows that most studies are concentrated in renowned journals and conferences, such as the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society and the Journal of Business Ethics. The main topics addressed include social responsibility of developers, algorithmic transparency, data privacy, and social and economic impacts of AI. An important gap identified is the lack of discussions on the use of AI in academic production, especially in relation to plagiarism, algorithmic bias, and scientific integrity. The study concludes that it is essential to establish clear guidelines for the ethical use of AI, ensuring transparency, accountability and human control over the technology.
Downloads
References
ABAD-SEGURA, E. et al. Effects of circular economic policies on the environment and sustainable growth: worldwide research. Sustainability, [s.l.], v. 12, n. 14, p. 5792, 2020. Disponível em: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5792. Acesso em: 01 maio 2023.
AI ETHICS LAB. About. Cambridge: AI Ethics Lab, 2022. Disponível em: https://aiethicslab.com/about/. Acesso em: 05 maio 2023.
AI NOW INSTITUTE. Home. [s.l.]: AI Now Institute, 2023. Disponível em: https://ainowinstitute.org/. Acesso em: 05 maio 2023.
ARBIX, G. A transparência no centro da construção de uma ia ética. Novos estudos CEBRAP, São Paulo, v. 39, n. 2, p. 395-413, 2020. Disponível em: https://www.scielo.br/j/nec/a/pD9k5gtHpXwsgFcsMC5gbJg/?format=pdf&lang=pt. Acesso em: 01 maio 2023.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. In: CAMBRIDGE DICTIONARY. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press & Assessment, 2023. Disponível em:https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/artificial-intelligence. Acesso em: 05 maio 2023.
ASSANGE, J. Quando o Google encontrou o WikiLeaks. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2015.
BARDIN, L. Análise de contéudo. São Paulo: Edições 70, 1977.
BASS, M. S. et al. Global conservation significance of Ecuador’s Yasuní National Park. PLoS ONE, [s.l.], v. 5, [s.n.], 2010. DOI https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008767.
BIRHANE, A. Algorithmic injustice: a relational ethics approach. Patterns, [s.l.], v. 2, n. 2, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100205.
BURLE, C.; CORTIZ, D. Mapeamento de princípios de inteligência artificial. São Paulo: Núcleo de Informação e Coordenação do Ponto BR, 2020. Disponível: https://nic.br/media/docs/publicacoes/17/20200721143359/digital_mapeamento_principios_IA_portugues.pdf. Acesso em: 17 maio 2023.
BURTON, E. et al. Ethical Considerations in Artificial Intelligence Courses. AI Magazine, Palo Alto, v. 38, n. 2, p. 22-34, summer 2017. Disponível em: https://ojs.aaai.org/aimagazine/index.php/aimagazine/article/view/2731. Acesso em: 05 maio 2023.
CAMPELLO, B. S.; CENDÓN, B. V.; KREMER, J. M. Fontes de informação para pesquisadores e profissionais. Belo Horizonte: Editora UFMG, 2000.
CARRIÓN-MERO, P. et al. Worldwide Research Trends in Landslide Science. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, [s.l.], v. 18, n. 18, 2021. DOI https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18189445.
COMISSÃO EUROPEIA. Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. Bruxelas: European Commission, 2019. Disponível em: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai. Acesso em: 05 maio 2023.
CORTIZ, D. Inteligência artificial: equidade, justiça e consequências. Panorama Setorial da Internet, São Paulo, v. 12, n. 1, 2020. Disponível: https://cetic.br/pt/publicacao/ano-xii-n-1-inteligencia-artificial-equidade-justica-e-consequencias/. Acesso em: 05 maio 2023.
CREMONESE, D. Ética e moral na contemporaneidade. Campos Neutrais: Revista Latino-Americana de Relações Internacionais, Rio Grande, v. 1, n. 1, p.8-28, jan./abr. 2019. DOI 10.14295/cn.v111.8618.
DANAHER, J. The threat of algocracy: reality, resistance and accommodation. Philosophy & Technology, [s.l.], v. 29, n. 3, p. 245-268, 2016. Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13347-015-0211-1. Acesso em: 05 maio 2023.
FAHIMNIA, B.; SARKIS, J.; DAVARZANI, H. Green supply chain management: review and bibliometric analysis. Int. J. Prod. Econ., [s.l.], v. 162, [s.n.], p. 101–114, Apr. 2015. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.01.003.
GARCIA, A. C. Ética e Inteligência Artificial. Computação Brasil, [s.l.], [s.n.], n. 43, p. 14–22, nov. 2020. Disponível em: https://sol.sbc.org.br/journals/index.php/comp-br/article/view/1791/1625. Acesso em: 17 maio 2023.
HAGENDORFF, T. The ethics of AI ethics: an evaluation of guidelines. Minds and Machines, [s.l.], v. 30, n. 1, p. 99–120, 2020. Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11023-020-09517-8. Acesso em: 21 abr. 2023.
HIBBARD, Bill. Open source AI. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, [s.l.], v. 171, n. 1, p. 473-477, 2008. Disponível em: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84875941203&partnerID=40&md5=9bfa745a75e9a3658c8fd2a2b50d6093. Acesso em: 19 mar. 2023.
HUMAN-CENTERED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [HAI]. Home. Stanford: Stanford University, 2021. Disponível em: https://hai.stanford.edu/. Acesso em: 07 maio 2023.
JASANOFF, S. States of knowledge: the co-production of science and social order. London: Routledge, 2004.
JOBIN, A.; IENCA, M.; VAYENA, E. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, [s.l.], v. 1, n. 9, p. 389–399, set. 2019. Disponível em: https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-019-0088-2. Acesso em: 07 maio 2023.
LATOUR, B. Pandora’s hope: essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999.
LI, H. et al. Ethics of large language models in medicine and medical research. The Lancet Digital Health, [s.l], v. 5, n. 6, p. 333 -335, abr. 2023. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00083-3.
LOFTUS, T. J. et al. Artificial Intelligence and surgical decision-making, JAMA Surgery, Chicago, v. 155, n. 02, p. 148-158, fev. 2020. DOI 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4917.
MORAES, J. A. O paradigma da complexidade e a Ética Informacional. Campinas: CLE, 2019. Disponível em: https://www.cle.unicamp.br/ebooks/index.php/publicacoes/catalog/book/7. Acesso em: 12 fev. 2025.
MORLEY, J. et al. From what to how: an initial review of publicly available ai ethics tools, methods and research to translate principles into practices. Science and Engineering Ethics, Califórnia, v. 26, n. 04, p. 2141-2168, ago. 2020. DOI 10.1007/s11948-019-00165-5.
MULLER, V. C. Ethics of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics. Stanford: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2020. Disponível em: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-ai/?utm_source=summari. Acesso em: 05 maio 2023.
ORGANIZAÇÃO MUNDIAL DA SAÚDE [OMS]. Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: WHO guidance. [s.l.]: World Health Organization, 2021. Disponível em: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/341996/9789240029200-eng.pdf. Acesso em: 20 mai. 2023.
ORGANIZAÇÃO PARA COOPERAÇÃO E DESENVOLVIMENTO ECONÔMICO [OCDE]. Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence. Paris: OCDE, 2019. Disponível em: https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/oecd-legal-0449. Acesso em: 05 mai. 2023.
PARTNERSHIP ON AI [PAI]. About us. [s.l.]: Partnership on AI, 2023. Disponível em: https://partnershiponai.org/about/. Acesso em: 07 maio 2023.
PRATES, B. P.; CHIARINI, T. Dependência na Era Digital: a divisão centro-periferia em Inteligência Artificial. Liinc em Revista, Rio de Janeiro, v. 20, n. 2, 2024. Disponível em: https://revista.ibict.br/liinc/article/view/7305/7052. Acesso em: 23 set. 2025.
ROBBINS, S. A misdirected principle with a catch: explicability for AI. Minds and Machines, [s.l.], v. 29, [s.n.], p. 495–514, 2019. Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11023-019-09509-3. Acesso em: 19 mar. 2023.
SCHNEIDER, M. Ética, política e epistemologia: interfaces da informação. In: ALBAGLI, Sarita (org.). Fronteiras da Ciência da Informação, Brasília (DF): IBICT, 2013.
SIAU, K.; WANG, W. Artificial Intelligence (AI) Ethics: Ethics of AI and Ethical AI. Journal of Database Management, [s.l.], v. 31, n. 02, p. 74-87, mar. 2020. Disponível em: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340115931_Artificial_Intelligence_AI_Ethics_Ethics_of_AI_and_Ethical_AI. Acesso em: 19 mar. 2023.
STAHL, B. C.; WRIGHT, D. Ethics and privacy in AI and Big Data: implementing responsible research and innovation. IEEE Security & Privacy, [s.l.], v. 15, n. 03, p. 22-33, maio/jun. 2018. DOI 10.1109/MSP.2018.2701164.
STRYKER, C.; SCAPICCHIO, M. O que é IA generativa? [s.l.]: IBM, 2024. Disponível em: https://www.ibm.com/br-pt/think/topics/generative-ai. Acesso em: 28 fev. 2025.
TRAN, B. X. et al. Global evolution of research in Artificial Intelligence in health and medicine: a bibliometric study. Journal of Clinical Medicine, [s.l.], v. 8, n. 3, mar. 2019. DOI 10.3390/jcm8030360.
VANTI, N. A. P. Da Bibliometria à Webometria: uma exploração conceitual dos mecanismos utilizados para medir o registro da informação e a difusão do conhecimento. Ciência da Informação, Brasília (DF), v. 31, n. 2, p. 152-162, maio/ago. 2002. Disponível em: https://revista.ibict.br/ciinf/article/view/970/1007. Acesso em: 12 fev. 2025.
VISSER, M.; VAN ECK, N. J.; WALTMAN, L. Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic. Quantitative Science Studies, [s.l.], v.2, [s.n.], p.20–41, 2021. DOI https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00112.
WHITTLESTONE, J. et al. The Role and Limits of Principles in AI Ethics: Towards a Focus on Tensions. In: AIES '19: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2019 AAAI/ACM CONFERENCE ON AI, ETHICS, AND SOCIETY, 19., 2019, Honolulu. Proceedings… Honolulu: AIES, 2019. p. 195–200. DOI https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314289.
WINNER, L. Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, v. 109, n. 1, p. 121–136, 1980.
Yin, R. K. Pesquisa qualitativa do início ao fim. Porto Alegre: Penso, 2016.
ZHU, J.; LIU, W. A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics, [s.l.], v. 123, [s.n.], p. 321–335, Feb. 2020. Disponível em: A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Acesso em: 05 maio 2023.
ZUBOFF, S. A era do capitalismo de vigilância. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Intrínseca, 2021.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ednéia Silva Santos Rocha, Diogo Roberto da Silva Andrade, Jean Carlos Ferreira dos Santos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright Notice
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, allowing the sharing of work and recognition of the work of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to take on additional contracts separately, non-exclusive distribution of the version of the paper published in this journal (ex.: distribute to an institutional repository or publish as a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to distribute their work online (eg.: in institutional repositories or on their website) at any point before or during the editorial process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as increase the impact and citation the published work.
