May I speak? Perceptions on ethical concerns and power while developing software in AI teams

• Gabriel M. C. Guimarães UnB http://orcid.org/0009-0009-0672-402X
• Geraldo Pereira Rocha Filho UESB http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6795-2768
• Gilmar dos Santos Marques UnB http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5900-3749
• Edna Dias Canedo UnB http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2159-339X

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/sbqs.2025.13576

Resumo

Context: As Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies increasingly influence decision-making processes, ethical concerns in AI development have gained significant attention. However, most research in this area focuses on high-level decision-makers or large technology corporations in the Global North, overlooking the lived experiences of software engineers in underrepresented contexts. Goal: This study investigates how Brazilian software engineers working in AI teams at a mid-sized company perceive ethical principles, navigate ethical dilemmas, and respond to emerging ethical concerns in their everyday work. The focus is on understanding how Junior, Mid-Level, and Senior developers interpret and apply ethical frameworks during the concrete development of AI systems such as classifiers, image generators, and object detectors. Method: A mixed-methods approach was adopted, combining data from 18 survey responses and 8 in-depth semi-structured interviews. The qualitative data were analyzed using a combination of inductive and deductive coding to identify recurring patterns, ethical challenges, and coping strategies. Results: Findings indicate that while participants are generally aware of key ethical principles—such as fairness, transparency, and accountability—their ability to act on ethical concerns is limited by factors including organizational hierarchies, lack of formal ethical training, and insufficient autonomy in design decisions. Ethical deliberation is often informal, reactive, and constrained by resource and power asymmetries. Conclusion: This research highlights the ethical agency of AI practitioners in the Global South and contributes to expanding the geographical and professional scope of AI ethics literature. It emphasizes the urgent need for organizational structures that empower developers to raise, discuss, and resolve ethical issues throughout the AI development lifecycle.

Palavras-chave: Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, Code of Ethics, Employment, AI Practitioners

Referências

Mamia Agbese, Rahul Mohanani, Arif Ali Khan, and Pekka Abrahamsson. 2023. Implementing AI Ethics: Making Sense of the Ethical Requirements. arXiv:2306.06749 [cs.CY] [link]

Kenzo Soares Seto and. 2025. AI From the South: artificial intelligence in Latin America through the sociotechnical imaginaries of Brazilian tech workers. Globalizations 0, 0 (2025), 1–16. DOI: 10.1080/14747731.2025.2465166

João Gabriel Rossi de BORBA. 2025. Do Abstrato ao Concreto: Uma Ferramenta para Implementação de Requisitos Éticos em Inteligência Artificial através de Histórias de Usuário. Dissertação (Mestrado em Informática). Universidade de Brasília, Brasília. [link]

José Antonio Siqueira de Cerqueira, Anayran Pinheiro De Azevedo, Heloise Acco Tives Leão, and Edna Dias Canedo. 2022. Guide for Artificial Intelligence Ethical Requirements Elicitation - RE4AI Ethical Guide. In 55th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2022, Virtual Event / Maui, Hawaii, USA, January 4-7, 2022. ScholarSpace, [link] 1–10.

Djellel Difallah, Elena Filatova, and Panos Ipeirotis. 2018. Demographics and Dynamics of Mechanical Turk Workers. In Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (Marina Del Rey, CA, USA) (WSDM ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 135–143. DOI: 10.1145/3159652.3159661

European Parliament and Council of the European Union. 2024. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689: Laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). [link]. Published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 12 July 2024; entered into force on 1 August 2024.

Isaias Ghebrehiwet, Nazar Zaki, Rafat Damseh, and Mohd Saberi Mohamad. 2024. Revolutionizing personalized medicine with generative AI: a systematic review. Artificial Intelligence Review 57, 5 (April 2024), 1–41. DOI: 10.1007/s10462-024-10768-5

Clendson Domingos Gonçalves, Eduardo de Paoli Menescal, Fábio Lúcio Lopes de Mendonça, and Edna Dias Canedo. 2024. Trust in AI: Perspectives of CLevel Executives in Brazilian Organizations. In Proceedings of the XXIII Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality, SBQS 2024, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, November 5-8, 2024, Ivan Machado, José Carlos Maldonado, Tayana Conte, Edna Dias Canedo, Johnny Marques, Breno Bernard Nicolau de França, Patrícia Matsubara, Davi Viana, Sérgio Soares, Gleison Santos, Larissa Rocha, Bruno Gadelha, Rodrigo Pereira dos Santos, Ana Carolina Oran, and Adolfo Gustavo Serra Seca Neto (Eds.). ACM, DOI: 10.1145/3701625.3701654 147–157.

Tricia A. Griffin, Brian P. Green, and Jos V.M. Welie. 2024. The ethical wisdom of AI developers. AI and Ethics 5, 2 (March 2024), 1087–1097. DOI: 10.1007/s43681-024-00458-x

Tricia A. Griffin, Brian Patrick Green, and Jos V. M. Welie. 2023. The ethical agency of AI developers. AI and Ethics 4, 2 (Jan. 2023), 179–188. DOI: 10.1007/s43681-022-00256-3

Arif Ali Khan, Muhammad Azeem Akbar, Mahdi Fahmideh, Peng Liang, Muhammad Waseem, Aakash Ahmad, Mahmood Niazi, and Pekka Abrahamsson. 2022. AI Ethics: An Empirical Study on the Views of Practitioners and Lawmakers. arXiv:2207.01493 [cs.CY] [link]

Fernando Korn Malerbi, Luis Filipe Nakayama, Robyn Gayle Dychiao, Lucas Zago Ribeiro, Cleva Villanueva, Leo Anthony Celi, and Caio Vinicius Regatieri. 2023. Digital Education for the Deployment of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care. Journal of Medical Internet Research 25 (June 2023), e43333. DOI: 10.2196/43333

Pushkar Mishra, Helen Yannakoudakis, and Ekaterina Shutova. 2021. Modeling Users and Online Communities for Abuse Detection: A Position on Ethics and Explainability. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021, Marie-Francine Moens, Xuanjing Huang, Lucia Specia, and Scott Wen-tau Yih (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, 3374–3385. DOI: 10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.287

Hamad Odhabi and Maurice Abi-Raad. 2024. Comparative Analysis of Microsoft and Google’s Strategies in the Era of Advanced Artificial Intelligence Technologies. In IBIMA Conference on Artificial intelligence and Machine Learning. Springer, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-79086-7_4 30–43.

Aastha Pant, Rashina Hoda, Simone V. Spiegler, Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn, and Burak Turhan. 2024. Ethics in the Age of AI: An Analysis of AI Practitioners’ Awareness and Challenges. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 33, 3, Article 80 (March 2024), 35 pages. DOI: 10.1145/3635715

Aastha Pant, Rashina Hoda, Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn, and Burak Turhan. 2024. Ethics in AI through the practitioner’s view: a grounded theory literature review. Empir. Softw. Eng. 29, 3 (2024), 67. DOI: 10.1007/S10664-024-10465-5

Daniel Porto, Renata Prado, Gilmar Marques, André Serrano, Fabio Mendonça, and Edna Canedo. 2025. Ethical Requirements in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Literature Review. In Anais do XXI Simpósio Brasileiro de Sistemas de Informação (Recife/PE). SBC, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil, 663–672. DOI: 10.5753/sbsi.2025.246613

Inioluwa Deborah Raji, Timnit Gebru, Margaret Mitchell, Joy Buolamwini, Joonseok Lee, and Emily Denton. 2020. Saving Face: Investigating the Ethical Concerns of Facial Recognition Auditing. In AIES ’20: AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, New York, NY, USA, February 7-8, 2020, Annette N. Markham, Julia Powles, Toby Walsh, and Anne L. Washington (Eds.). ACM, DOI: 10.1145/3375627.3375820 145–151.

Thibault Schrepel and Jason Potts. 2025. Measuring the openness of AI foundation models: competition and policy implications. Information & Communications Technology Law 34, issue 3 (2025), 1–26.

Senado Federal. 2023. Projeto de Lei n° 2338, de 2023: Dispõe sobre o uso da Inteligência Artificial. [link]. Autoria: Senador Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD/MG); Nº na Câmara: PL 2338/2023.

The White House. 2023. Executive Order 14110: Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence. [link]. Executive Order 14110, issued October 30, 2023.

Rich Timpone and Yongwei Yang. 2018. Justice Rising - The Growing Ethical Importance of Big Data, Survey Data, Models and AI. In BigSurv 18 (Big Data Meet Survey Science) conference. Research Google, [link] 1.

Ville Vakkuri, Kai-Kristian Kemell, Marianna Jantunen, and Pekka Abrahamsson. 2020. “This is Just a Prototype”: How Ethics Are Ignored in Software Startup-Like Environments. In Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming, Viktoria Stray, Rashina Hoda, Maria Paasivaara, and Philippe Kruchten (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 195–210.

Ville Vakkuri, Kai-Kristian Kemell, Joel Tolvanen, Marianna Jantunen, Erika Halme, and Pekka Abrahamsson. 2022. How Do Software Companies Deal with Artificial Intelligence Ethics? A Gap Analysis. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (Gothenburg, Sweden) (EASE ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, DOI: 10.1145/3530019.3530030 100–109.

Ville Vakkuri, Kai-Kristian Kemell, Joel Tolvanen, Marianna Jantunen, Erika Halme, and Pekka Abrahamsson. 2022. How Do Software Companies Deal with Artificial Intelligence Ethics? A Gap Analysis. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (Gothenburg, Sweden) (EASE ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 100–109. DOI: 10.1145/3530019.3530030

David Gray Widder, Derrick Zhen, Laura Dabbish, and James Herbsleb. 2023. It’s about power: What ethical concerns do software engineers have, and what do they (feel they can) do about them?. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (Chicago, IL, USA) (FAccT ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 467–479. DOI: 10.1145/3593013.3594012

Claes Wohlin, Per Runeson, Martin Höst, Magnus C. Ohlsson, Björn Regnell, and Anders Wesslén. 2012. Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-29044-2.

Abdullahi Yusuf, Nasrin Pervin, Marcos Román-González, and Norah Md Noor. 2024. Generative AI in education and research: A systematic mapping review. Review of Education 12, 2 (Aug. 2024), 1–36. DOI: 10.1002/rev3.3489