Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
167 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Stop! In the Name of Flaws: Disentangling Personal Names and Sociodemographic Attributes in NLP (2405.17159v2)

Published 27 May 2024 in cs.CL, cs.CY, and cs.HC

Abstract: Personal names simultaneously differentiate individuals and categorize them in ways that are important in a given society. While the natural language processing community has thus associated personal names with sociodemographic characteristics in a variety of tasks, researchers have engaged to varying degrees with the established methodological problems in doing so. To guide future work that uses names and sociodemographic characteristics, we provide an overview of relevant research: first, we present an interdisciplinary background on names and naming. We then survey the issues inherent to associating names with sociodemographic attributes, covering problems of validity (e.g., systematic error, construct validity), as well as ethical concerns (e.g., harms, differential impact, cultural insensitivity). Finally, we provide guiding questions along with normative recommendations to avoid validity and ethical pitfalls when dealing with names and sociodemographic characteristics in natural language processing.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (125)
  1. Error analysis of Uyghur name tagging: Language-specific techniques and remaining challenges. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018), Miyazaki, Japan. European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
  2. Michael D. Adams. 2009. Power, politeness, and the pragmatics of nicknames. Names, 57:81–91.
  3. AIATSIS. 2022. Indigenous names. https://aiatsis.gov.au/family-history/you-start/indigenous-names.
  4. Richard Alford. 1987. Naming and identity: A cross-cultural study of personal naming practices. Hraf Press.
  5. David J. Allerton. 1987. The linguistic and sociolinguistic status of proper names what are they, and who do they belong to? Journal of Pragmatics, 11:61–92.
  6. Names in literature : essays from Literary onomastics studies. University Press of America.
  7. John Anderson. 2003. On the structure of names. Folia Linguistica.
  8. The gender gap tracker: Using natural language processing to measure gender bias in media. PLoS ONE, 16.
  9. Austin A Baker and J Remy Green. 2021. There is no such thing as a ‘legal name’: A strange, shared delusion. Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 53:129.
  10. Shaowen Bardzell. 2010. Feminist hci: taking stock and outlining an agenda for design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, page 1301–1310, Atlanta Georgia USA. ACM.
  11. Herbert Barry and Aylene S. Harper. 1982. Evolution of unisex names. Names, 30(1):15–22.
  12. Herbert Barry and Aylene S. Harper. 1993. Feminization of unisex names from 1960 to 1990. Names, 41(4):228–238.
  13. Birgit Becker. 2009. Immigrants’ emotional identification with the host society: The example of turkish parents’ naming practices in germany. Ethnicities, 9(2):200–225.
  14. What is the point of fairness? disability, ai and the complexity of justice. SIGACCESS Access. Comput., (125).
  15. Sebastian Benthall and Bruce D. Haynes. 2019. Racial categories in machine learning. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAT* ’19, page 289–298, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  16. Elettra Bietti. 2019. From ethics washing to ethics bashing: a view on tech ethics from within moral philosophy. Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency.
  17. The values encoded in machine learning research. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAccT ’22, page 173–184, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  18. Language (technology) is power: A critical survey of “bias” in NLP. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 5454–5476, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  19. Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star. 2000. Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. The MIT Press.
  20. Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases. Science, 356(6334):183–186.
  21. Graham Cameron. 2004. Evidence in an indigenous world. In Australasian Evaluation Society 2004 International Conference, Adelaide, South Australia.
  22. Yang Trista Cao and Hal Daumé III. 2021. Toward gender-inclusive coreference resolution: An analysis of gender and bias throughout the machine learning lifecycle*. Computational Linguistics, 47(3):615–661.
  23. Cherie Chan. 2016. Why Chinese speakers use Western names. https://www.dw.com/en/why-some-chinese-speakers-also-use-western-names/a-18966907.
  24. epluribus: Ethnicity on social networks. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.
  25. Jennifer Chien and David Danks. 2024. Beyond behaviorist representational harms: A plan for measurement and mitigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01705.
  26. Bagele Chilisa. 2019. Indigenous research methodologies. Sage publications.
  27. Patricia Hill Collins. 2019. Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory. Duke University Press.
  28. Validated names for experimental studies on race and ethnicity. Scientific Data, 10.
  29. Classist tools: Social class correlates with performance in nlp. Preprint, arXiv:2403.04445.
  30. Edward E. Curtis. 2005. African-american islamization reconsidered: Black history narratives and muslim identity. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 73:659–684.
  31. Stephen Darwall. 1977. Two kinds of respect. Ethics, 88:36 – 49.
  32. Bias in bios: A case study of semantic representation bias in a high-stakes setting. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAT* ’19, page 120–128, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  33. Harms of gender exclusivity and challenges in non-binary representation in language technologies. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1968–1994, Online and Punta Cana, Dominican Republic. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  34. Theories of “gender” in nlp bias research. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAccT ’22, page 2083–2102, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  35. An intersectional approach to designing in the margins. Interactions, 25(3):66–69.
  36. Michael Färber and Lin Ao. 2022. The microsoft academic knowledge graph enhanced: Author name disambiguation, publication classification, and embeddings. Quantitative Science Studies, 3:51–98.
  37. J. Feinberg. 1984. Harmless Wrongdoing. Moral Limits of the Criminal Law. Oxford University Press.
  38. A survey of race, racism, and anti-racism in NLP. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 1905–1925, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  39. Luciano Floridi and Josh Cowls. 2019. A Unified Framework of Five Principles for AI in Society. Harvard Data Science Review, 1(1). Https://hdsr.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/l0jsh9d1.
  40. S. Michael Gaddis. 2017a. How black are lakisha and jamal? racial perceptions from names used in correspondence audit studies. Randomized Social Experiments eJournal.
  41. S. Michael Gaddis. 2017b. Racial/ethnic perceptions from hispanic names: Selecting names to test for discrimination. Socius, 3.
  42. Datasheets for datasets. Commun. ACM, 64(12):86–92.
  43. Ben Green. 2019. Good” isn’t good enough. In Proceedings of the AI for Social Good workshop at NeurIPS, volume 17.
  44. Ben Green. 2021. The contestation of tech ethics: A sociotechnical approach to technology ethics in practice. Journal of Social Computing, 2(3):209–225.
  45. Better, nicer, clearer, fairer: A critical assessment of the movement for ethical artificial intelligence and machine learning. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
  46. Oliver L Haimson and Anna Lauren Hoffmann. 2016. Constructing and enforcing" authentic" identity online: Facebook, real names, and non-normative identities. First Monday.
  47. Towards a critical race methodology in algorithmic fairness. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAT* ’20, page 501–512, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  48. Alex Hanna and Tina M Park. 2020. Against scale: Provocations and resistances to scale thinking. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.08850.
  49. Karen Hao. 2019. In 2020, let’s stop AI ethics-washing and actually do something. https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/12/27/57/ai-ethics-washing-time-to-act/.
  50. Donna Haraway. 1988. Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3):575–599.
  51. Leigh Honeywell. 2016. neveragain.tech. https://neveragain.tech/.
  52. Carole Hough. 2016. The Oxford Handbook of Names and Naming. Oxford University Press.
  53. Abigail Z. Jacobs and Hanna Wallach. 2021. Measurement and fairness. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, page 375–385, Virtual Event Canada. ACM.
  54. Examining the causal impact of first names on language models: The case of social commonsense reasoning. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Trustworthy Natural Language Processing (TrustNLP 2023), pages 61–72, Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  55. Robin Jeshion. 2009. The significance of names. Mind  & Language, 24(4):370–403.
  56. Austin H Johnson. 2016. Transnormativity: A new concept and its validation through documentary film about transgender men. Sociological inquiry, 86(4):465–491.
  57. Astrid Kaiser. 2010. „kevin ist kein name, sondern eine diagnose!“der vorname in der grundschule–klangwort, modewort oder reizwort. Die Grundschulzeitschrift, 24:26–29.
  58. Inferring gender from names on the web: A comparative evaluation of gender detection methods. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web - WWW ’16 Companion, page 53–54, Montréal, Québec, Canada. ACM Press.
  59. Os Keyes. 2017. Stop mapping names to gender.
  60. Os Keyes. 2018. The misgendering machines: Trans/hci implications of automatic gender recognition. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., 2(CSCW).
  61. Human-computer insurrection: Notes on an anarchist hci. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’19, page 1–13, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  62. You keep using that word: Ways of thinking about gender in computing research. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., 5(CSCW1).
  63. What’s in a name? a multiracial investigation of the role of occupational stereotypes in selection decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36:1145–1159.
  64. Systematic errors, page 83–96. Cambridge University Press.
  65. Demographer: Extremely simple name demographics. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on NLP and Computational Social Science, pages 108–113, Austin, Texas. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  66. Lex Konnelly. 2021. Nuance and normativity in trans linguistic research. Journal of Language and Sexuality, 10:71–82.
  67. Avoiding bias when inferring race using name-based approaches. Plos one, 17(3):e0264270.
  68. Brian Larson. 2017. Gender as a variable in natural-language processing: Ethical considerations. In Proceedings of the First ACL Workshop on Ethics in Natural Language Processing, pages 1–11, Valencia, Spain. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  69. Welcome to the modern world of pronouns: Identity-inclusive natural language processing beyond gender. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 1221–1232, Gyeongju, Republic of Korea. International Committee on Computational Linguistics.
  70. David C.S. Li. 1997. Borrowed identity: Signaling involvement with a western name. Journal of Pragmatics, 28(4):489–513. Language and Discourse Issues in Hong Kong’s Change of Sovereignity.
  71. Semantic transliteration of personal names. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, pages 120–127, Prague, Czech Republic. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  72. Are we learning yet? a meta review of evaluation failures across machine learning. In Thirty-fifth Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems Datasets and Benchmarks Track (Round 2).
  73. Wendy Liu and Derek Ruths. 2013. What’s in a name? using first names as features for gender inference in twitter. In AAAI Spring Symposium: Analyzing Microtext.
  74. Name-based demographic inference and the unequal distribution of misrecognition. Nature Human Behaviour, 7(7):1084–1095.
  75. María Lugones. 2016. The Coloniality of Gender, pages 13–33. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London.
  76. Gideon S. Mann and David Yarowsky. 2003. Unsupervised personal name disambiguation. In Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning.
  77. Gary T. Marx. 1999. What’s in a name? some reflections on the sociology of anonymity. Inf. Soc., 15:99–112.
  78. It’s all in the name: Mitigating gender bias with name-based counterfactual data substitution. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), pages 5267–5275, Hong Kong, China. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  79. Patrick McKenzie. 2010. Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Names | Kalzumeus Software. https://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/.
  80. Chan Tov Mcnamarah. 2020. Misgendering. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Trans Studies.
  81. José Medina. 2017. Varieties of hermeneutical injustice, pages 41–52. Taylor and Francis.
  82. Ramanujam Meganathan. 2009. The politics of naming. Contributions to Indian Sociology, 43:317–324.
  83. Samuel Messick. 1995. Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance asessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(4):5–8.
  84. Jennifer Mickel. 2024. Racial/ethnic categories in ai and algorithmic fairness: Why they matter and what they represent. ArXiv, abs/2404.06717.
  85. Sabrina Mielke. 2024. Personal communication.
  86. Reflections on gender analyses of bibliographic corpora. Frontiers in Big Data, 2:29.
  87. Extracting personal names from email: Applying named entity recognition to informal text. In Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 443–450, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  88. Saif M. Mohammad. 2020. Gender gap in natural language processing research: Disparities in authorship and citations. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 7860–7870, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  89. Renaming me: Assessing the influence of gender identity on name selection. Names, 67(4):199–211.
  90. Ìkòtún Reuben Olúwáfeḿi. 2014. New trends in yorùbá personal names among yorùbá christians. Linguistik Online, 59(2).
  91. Factoring the matrix of domination: A critical review and reimagination of intersectionality in ai fairness. In Proceedings of the 2023 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, AIES ’23, page 496–511, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  92. Jane Pilcher. 2017. Names and “doing gender”: How forenames and surnames contribute to gender identities, difference, and inequalities. Sex Roles, 77:812–822.
  93. What’s in a name? Reducing bias in bios without access to protected attributes. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers), pages 4187–4195, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  94. A rose by any other name would not smell as sweet: Social bias in names mistranslation. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 3933–3945, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  95. Morgan Klaus Scheuerman and Jed R. Brubaker. 2024. Products of positionality: How tech workers shape identity concepts in computer vision. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, page 1–18, Honolulu HI USA. ACM.
  96. How computers see gender: An evaluation of gender classification in commercial facial analysis services. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., 3(CSCW).
  97. Hci guidelines for gender equity and inclusivity.
  98. How we’ve taught algorithms to see identity: Constructing race and gender in image databases for facial analysis. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW1):1–35.
  99. Neural machine translation of rare words with subword units. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 1715–1725, Berlin, Germany. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  100. Khaled Shaalan and Hafsa Raza. 2007. Person name entity recognition for Arabic. In Proceedings of the 2007 Workshop on Computational Approaches to Semitic Languages: Common Issues and Resources, pages 17–24, Prague, Czech Republic. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  101. “you are grounded!”: Latent name artifacts in pre-trained language models. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 6850–6861, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  102. Eric Michael Smith and Adina Williams. 2021. Hi, my name is martha: Using names to measure and mitigate bias in generative dialogue models. ArXiv, abs/2109.03300.
  103. Robyn Speer. 2021. Google scholar has failed us.
  104. Christina R. Steidl and Regina Werum. 2019. If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail: Operationalization matters. Sociology Compass, 13(8):e12727.
  105. Anselm L Strauss. 2017. Mirrors and masks: The search for identity. Routledge.
  106. Christina A. Sue and Edward E. Telles. 2007. Assimilation and gender in naming. American Journal of Sociology, 112(5):1383–1415.
  107. On the machine learning of ethical judgments from natural language. In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 769–779, Seattle, United States. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  108. Rachael Tatman. 2020. What i won’t build. https://www.rctatman.com/talks/what-i-wont-build.
  109. Department of Internal Affairs | Te Tari Taiwhenua. 2021. Press Releases - dia.govt.nz — dia.govt.nz. https://www.dia.govt.nz/press.nsf/d77da9b523f12931cc256ac5000d19b6/d1288ac08d7758c2cc25838200107411!OpenDocument.
  110. Konstantinos Tzioumis. 2018. Demographic aspects of first names. Scientific Data, 5.
  111. United States National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1978. The Belmont report: ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research, volume 2. United States National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research.
  112. U.S. Census. 2020. First name frequency by gender.
  113. U.S. Social Security Administration. 2023. Top 10 baby names of 2023.
  114. An open-source cultural consensus approach to name-based gender classification. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 17:866–877.
  115. Values, ethics, morals? on the use of moral concepts in NLP research. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023, pages 5534–5554, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  116. Adam Vogel and Dan Jurafsky. 2012. He said, she said: Gender in the ACL Anthology. In Proceedings of the ACL-2012 Special Workshop on Rediscovering 50 Years of Discoveries, pages 33–41, Jeju Island, Korea. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  117. Subhah Wadhawan. 2022. Let the machines do the dirty work: Social media, machine learning technology and the iteration of racialized surveillance. Canadian Journal of Law and Technology, 20(1):1.
  118. We are who we cite: Bridges of influence between natural language processing and other academic fields. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 12896–12913, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  119. Measuring and mitigating name biases in neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 2576–2590, Dublin, Ireland. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  120. Disembodied machine learning: On the illusion of objectivity in nlp. Preprint, arXiv:2101.11974.
  121. Measuring and reducing gendered correlations in pre-trained models. Preprint, arXiv:2010.06032.
  122. Paul Weindling. 2001. The origins of informed consent: The international scientific commission on medical war crimes, and the nuremberg code. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 75(1):37–71.
  123. Sasha Weitman. 1981. Some methodological issues in quantitative onomastics. Names, 29(3):181–196.
  124. John F. Williams. 1924. The geneva protocol of 1924 for the pacific settlement of international disputes1. Journal of the British Institute of International Affairs, 3(6):288–304.
  125. Robert Wolfe and Aylin Caliskan. 2021. Low frequency names exhibit bias and overfitting in contextualizing language models. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 518–532, Online and Punta Cana, Dominican Republic. Association for Computational Linguistics.
Citations (2)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

  • The paper highlights that using personal names as proxies for demographics often results in high error rates and systematic selection bias.
  • It reveals ethical issues, including misclassification harms and the reinforcement of stereotypes against marginalized groups.
  • The authors recommend context-aware and qualitative approaches to mitigate biases and ensure respectful, accurate representation in NLP.

Methodological and Ethical Considerations in Associating Personal Names with Sociodemographic Characteristics in NLP

Overview

The paper tackles a nuanced and often delicate subject: the methodological and ethical implications of associating personal names with sociodemographic characteristics within the context of NLP. It offers an interdisciplinary background on the discussions surrounding names and naming conventions from fields such as anthropology, sociology, linguistics, and onomastics, providing a rich context for NLP researchers. The authors present a comprehensive survey of the methodological pitfalls, including issues of validity and ethical points of concern.

Methodological Issues

Validity Concerns

The paper explores several validity problems when using personal names as proxies for sociodemographic attributes. Some key issues include the difficulty in quantifying error robustly due to cultural and temporal variations in naming practices. Studies cited show a high variance in error rates for name-based gender and race inference systems, indicating a lack of reliability in these methodologies.

  1. Systematic Error and Selection Bias: The paper points out the dangers of assigning majority class labels to ambiguous names or excluding uninformative names, which distorts data and results.
  2. Construct Validity: There are inherent challenges in measuring abstract concepts like gender or race with personal names. The authors argue that such constructs are often reduced to one-dimensional labels, which do not align with the intricate and multifaceted nature of human identities.
  3. Classification Systems: The work critiques the tendency of classification systems to not just reflect reality but also create it by reinforcing culturally and politically influenced views of the world.

Ethical Issues

The ethical ramifications highlighted include:

  1. Harms from Errors: Errors in name-based inference can cause significant individual and group-level harms, such as misgendering and racial misclassification, which have psychological and social impacts.
  2. Differential Impact of Errors: Errors are not evenly distributed; certain demographic groups tend to experience higher misclassification rates, exacerbating existing inequities.
  3. Representational Harms: Misrepresentations can reinforce negative stereotypes and essentialist views, leading to broader societal harms.
  4. Cultural Insensitivity: The paper criticizes the Western-centric assumptions that often underlie naming conventions in NLP systems, arguing that they ignore the vast heterogeneity in global naming practices.
  5. Power Dynamics: The authors emphasize that the way names and sociodemographic characteristics are operationalized can reinforce existing power structures rather than challenge them.

Practical Recommendations

The paper offers a set of guiding questions and normative recommendations to help navigate these complex issues:

  1. Study Focus: Researchers should clarify whether their paper focuses on names as linguistic entities or on people through their names.
  2. Contextual Understanding: It is vital to understand the geographic, cultural, and temporal context of the names being studied.
  3. Alternative Methods: Researchers are encouraged to consider if NLP is the best method for their research questions, suggesting qualitative methods as potentially more ethical and effective in certain cases.
  4. Mitigating Harms: Transparency about potential methodological and ethical problems is critical, and researchers should prioritize principles like autonomy, justice, and beneficence.
  5. Descriptive vs. Prescriptive: Distinguishing between describing existing phenomena and reinforcing norms is crucial in the design and communication of research.
  6. Power Redistribution: The paper calls for a reimagining of power relations in research to align with user autonomy and justice-oriented frameworks.

Implications and Future Directions

This paper contributes significantly to the discourse on the ethical and methodological best practices in associating names with sociodemographic characteristics in NLP. The implications are far-reaching, impacting the design, implementation, and interpretation of NLP systems in ways that can promote a more inclusive and respectful approach to demographic analysis.

Future developments in NLP should prioritize the integration of these recommendations, fostering a research environment that is not only methodologically sound but also ethically responsible. By addressing the complex interplay of names, identity, and societal structures, the NLP community can avoid reinforcing harmful biases and instead contribute to a more equitable technological landscape.

In summary, this paper serves as a critical resource for guiding responsible research practices in NLP, particularly in the domain of personal names and sociodemographic characteristics. It underscores the necessity of a careful, contextually informed approach that respects the diverse and dynamic nature of human identity.

File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com PDF File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Markdown