Citizens' attitudes towards automated decision-making

Inf. Polity Pub Date : 2022-04-22 DOI:10.3233/ip-211516
T. Denk, Karin Hedström, F. Karlsson
{"title":"Citizens' attitudes towards automated decision-making","authors":"T. Denk, Karin Hedström, F. Karlsson","doi":"10.3233/ip-211516","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Public organisations are starting to show an interest in automated decision-making (ADM). So far, existing research focuses on the governmental perspective on this phenomenon. Less attention is paid to citizens’ views on ADM. The aim of this study is to provide empirical insights into citizen awareness of and beliefs about ADM in public-sector services. To this end, we participated in an annual national survey in Sweden carried out by the SOM Institute at Gothenburg University concluding that a minority of the citizens know about the use of ADM in public-sector services. Furthermore, when computers instead of civil servants make decisions in the public-sector, citizens expect decisions by computers to become less legally secure but more impartial. They also expect ADM to take personal circumstances into account to a lesser degree and become less transparent. Finally, we found that citizens with that awareness expect decisions by computers to become more reliable and impartial. Based on our empirical findings in relation to previous research, we suggest four hypotheses on citizen’s awareness and beliefs about public-sector ADM.","PeriodicalId":418875,"journal":{"name":"Inf. Polity","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inf. Polity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-211516","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Public organisations are starting to show an interest in automated decision-making (ADM). So far, existing research focuses on the governmental perspective on this phenomenon. Less attention is paid to citizens’ views on ADM. The aim of this study is to provide empirical insights into citizen awareness of and beliefs about ADM in public-sector services. To this end, we participated in an annual national survey in Sweden carried out by the SOM Institute at Gothenburg University concluding that a minority of the citizens know about the use of ADM in public-sector services. Furthermore, when computers instead of civil servants make decisions in the public-sector, citizens expect decisions by computers to become less legally secure but more impartial. They also expect ADM to take personal circumstances into account to a lesser degree and become less transparent. Finally, we found that citizens with that awareness expect decisions by computers to become more reliable and impartial. Based on our empirical findings in relation to previous research, we suggest four hypotheses on citizen’s awareness and beliefs about public-sector ADM.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公民对自动化决策的态度
公共机构开始对自动决策(ADM)表现出兴趣。到目前为止,已有的研究主要是从政府的角度来看待这一现象。公民对行政管理的看法受到的关注较少。本研究的目的是为公共部门服务中公民对行政管理的意识和信念提供实证见解。为此,我们参加了瑞典哥德堡大学SOM研究所开展的年度全国调查,得出的结论是,少数公民知道在公共部门服务中使用ADM。此外,当计算机代替公务员在公共部门做出决策时,公民期望计算机的决策在法律上变得不那么安全,但更加公正。他们还期望ADM减少对个人情况的考虑,并降低透明度。最后,我们发现具有这种意识的公民期望计算机的决策变得更加可靠和公正。基于前人研究的实证结果,本文提出了公民公共部门ADM意识与信念的四个假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Policy Review: The Evolving Governance of Surveillance Cameras in the UK Editorial: Improving Diversity in our Journal Two Editorials: An Editorial by the Editors-in-Chief and an Editorial by ChatGPT The Dutch Open Government Act: Bridging old and new open government? The Power of Partnership in Open Government: Reconsidering Multistakeholder Governance Reform
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1