Disclosure without Engagement: An Empirical Review of Positionality Statements at FAccT

Abstract

Positionality statements have become more common in engineering fields in recent years, despite ongoing debates across many fields about the merits of the practice. In 2024, the Program Chairs of FAccT recommended that authors include positionality statements with their paper submissions, dramatically increasing their use at the conference. In this paper, we analyze all positionality statements at FAccT from 2018 to 2024, highlighting the different aspects of identity commonly disclosed by authors and the degree to which authors explore the potential impact of these aspects of their positionality on their research. While we encountered and highlight a number of thoughtful positionality statements, we also identified and describe several concerning trends, including patterns of identity disclosure without discussion of corresponding impacts, a notable lack of reflection on the potential impacts of industry affiliation, and cases where identity is invoked to excuse what are really methodological choices, among others. We raise particular concerns about the possibility that disclosure without engagement may cause readers to rely on stereotypes to make guesses about the perspectives that individuals from certain groups bring to their work. We conclude by considering potential mechanisms for encouraging reflexivity in the FAccT community, with a focus on setting policies that protect researchers from risks, supporting researchers from backgrounds without existing traditions of reflexive practice, and empirically evaluating the efficacy of interventions designed to foster reflexivity.