Kohesi: Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi

Articles

Vol. 10 No. 6 (2025): Kohesi: Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi, ISSN 3025-1311

SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW : ETIKA PENGGUNAAN KECERDASAN BUATAN DALAM KEHIDUPAN SEHARI-HARI

Submitted
November 30, 2025
Published
2025-11-30

Abstract

Digital assistants, recommendation systems, smart devices, and healthcare services are some examples of everyday applications that use AI. AI has many ethical issues despite being easy and efficient. These are mainly related to algorithmic bias, data privacy, transparency, accountability, and social effects. The purpose of this study is to identify the main ethical issues, research methods used, and differences in research on the use of AI. This study uses a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) approach. The search process was conducted on the Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, and ScienceDirect databases using keywords related to AI ethics in the range of 2019–2025. Of the 42 articles identified, only 9 articles met the inclusion criteria for further analysis. The results of the thematic analysis showed four dominant ethical issues, namely data privacy and security, algorithmic bias and fairness, transparency and accountability, and socio-economic impacts. From a methodological perspective, the majority of studies use qualitative approaches or conceptual studies, while empirical research remains very limited. In addition, several research gaps were found, such as the absence of integrated AI ethical standards, a lack of empirical studies, a lack of research in developing countries, and a weak multidisciplinary approach. The results show that a broader AI ethical framework and further research based on real-world evaluation are needed to ensure that the use of AI remains in line with human values and the principles of human-centered AI.

References

  1. Afreen, J., Mohaghegh, M. and Doborjeh, M. (2025) ‘Systematic literature review on bias mitigation in generative AI’, AI and Ethics, 5(5), pp. 4789–4841. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-025-00721-9.
  2. Arrieta, A. B., et al. (2020). Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges. Information Fusion, 58, 82–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012.
  3. Nusivera, S. (2025). Governance and Ethical Risk Management Framework for AI- Powered Tax Systems : A Post-Coretax Reform Proposal. 3(10), 813–832.
  4. Elfahim, O., et al. (2025). A Systematic Literature Review of Artificial Intelligence in Prehospital Emergency Care. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 9(9), 249–266. https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc9090219.
  5. Ethics and Morality in AI – A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research. (n.d.). Retrieved November 11, 2025, from https://cs.reviewer.ly/publication/1587994f-c892-4b08-b20f-15947dc97e3d.
  6. Firera, A., et al. (2023). A Systematic Literature Review. In Proceedings (pp. 282–307). https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-090-9_24.
  7. Fjeld, J., et al. (2020). Principled artificial intelligence: Mapping consensus in ethical and rights-based approaches to principles for AI. Berkman Klein Center Research Publication. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3518482.
  8. Floridi, L., & Cowls, J. (2019). A unified framework of five principles for AI in society. Harvard Data Science Review, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.8cd550d1.
  9. Hagendorff, T. (2020). The ethics of AI ethics: An evaluation of guidelines. Minds and Machines, 30, 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09517-8.
  10. Jobin, A., Ienca, M. & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389–399. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2.
  11. Karimian, G., Petelos, E., & Evers, S. M. A. A. (2022). The ethical issues of the application of artificial intelligence in healthcare: A systematic scoping review. AI and Ethics, 2(4), 539–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00131-7.
  12. Kitchenham, B., Charters, S., Budgen, D., Brereton, P., Turner, M., Linkman, S., Jørgensen, M., Mendes, E., & Visaggio, G. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering (Version 2.3). EBSE Technical Report, EBSE-2007-01, Keele University & Durham University.
  13. Lepri, B., Oliver, N., Letouzé, E., Pentland, A. & Vinck, P. (2018). Fair, transparent, and accountable algorithmic decision-making processes. Philosophy & Technology, 31(4), 611–627. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0279-x .
  14. Mittelstadt, B. (2019). Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1, 501–507. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0114-4.
  15. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
  16. Mohaghegh, S. (2024). Engineering application of artificial intelligence. Engineering Education, 01(01), 174–180. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--44906.
  17. Pant, A., et al. (2024). Ethics in AI through the practitioner’s view: A grounded theory literature review. Empirical Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-024-10465-5.
  18. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

61-70 of 426

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.