公共部门决策支持算法:对个案工作者自由评估和推理的影响

IF 0.2 0 PHILOSOPHY
Ayo Næsborg-Andersen, Ole Hammerslev, Jøren Ullits
{"title":"公共部门决策支持算法:对个案工作者自由评估和推理的影响","authors":"Ayo Næsborg-Andersen, Ole Hammerslev, Jøren Ullits","doi":"10.7146/politica.v55i3.140278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Caseworkers in the public administration must make decisions based on accurate and objective information and be able to explain their reasoning. They are increasingly relying on decision-supporting algorithms that prioritize output over reasoning. While these algorithms can streamline and improve workflows, they also challenge fundamental principles of legal certainty. Utilizing data from the ASTA report on caseworkers’ experiences with algorithms in risk assessments of newly unemployed individuals as a case, we examine how automation bias and the black box paradox can affect caseworkers’ reasoning and justification of decisions. While the decision-making process may become more efficient in handling large datasets, fundamental principles of the rule of law may be challenged.","PeriodicalId":40761,"journal":{"name":"Filosofia Politica","volume":"56 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decision-supporting algorithms in the public sector: The influence on caseworkers’ discretionary assessment and reasoning\",\"authors\":\"Ayo Næsborg-Andersen, Ole Hammerslev, Jøren Ullits\",\"doi\":\"10.7146/politica.v55i3.140278\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Caseworkers in the public administration must make decisions based on accurate and objective information and be able to explain their reasoning. They are increasingly relying on decision-supporting algorithms that prioritize output over reasoning. While these algorithms can streamline and improve workflows, they also challenge fundamental principles of legal certainty. Utilizing data from the ASTA report on caseworkers’ experiences with algorithms in risk assessments of newly unemployed individuals as a case, we examine how automation bias and the black box paradox can affect caseworkers’ reasoning and justification of decisions. While the decision-making process may become more efficient in handling large datasets, fundamental principles of the rule of law may be challenged.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40761,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Filosofia Politica\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Filosofia Politica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7146/politica.v55i3.140278\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filosofia Politica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/politica.v55i3.140278","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

公共行政中的个案工作者必须根据准确客观的信息做出决策,并能够解释他们的推理。他们越来越依赖于优先考虑输出而非推理的决策支持算法。虽然这些算法可以简化和改进工作流程,但它们也挑战了法律确定性的基本原则。利用ASTA关于个案工作者在新失业个体风险评估中使用算法的经验报告中的数据作为案例,我们研究了自动化偏见和黑箱悖论如何影响个案工作者的推理和决策辩护。虽然决策过程在处理大型数据集方面可能变得更加有效,但法治的基本原则可能受到挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Decision-supporting algorithms in the public sector: The influence on caseworkers’ discretionary assessment and reasoning
Caseworkers in the public administration must make decisions based on accurate and objective information and be able to explain their reasoning. They are increasingly relying on decision-supporting algorithms that prioritize output over reasoning. While these algorithms can streamline and improve workflows, they also challenge fundamental principles of legal certainty. Utilizing data from the ASTA report on caseworkers’ experiences with algorithms in risk assessments of newly unemployed individuals as a case, we examine how automation bias and the black box paradox can affect caseworkers’ reasoning and justification of decisions. While the decision-making process may become more efficient in handling large datasets, fundamental principles of the rule of law may be challenged.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Filosofia Politica
Filosofia Politica PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信