Understanding Automated Decision-Making in the Public Sector: A Classification of Automated, Administrative Decision-Making
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
All cases represent use of semi- and fully automated decision-systems that are part of wider, complex algorithmic systems incorporating multiple ICT systems, government databases, citizen portals and intertwined networks often based on combinations of robotic process automation, rule-based (expert) models, regression, big data, and machine learning.
“All cases represent use of semi and fully automated decision-systems which are part of wider, complex algorithmic systems incorporating multiple ICT systems, government databases, citizen portals and intertwined networks often based on combinations of robotic process automation, rule-based (expert) models, regression, big data, and machine learning (Roehl, 2022).”
From Inside algorithmic bureaucracy: Disentangling automated decision-making and good administration (2025) · cites this paper as Roehl, 2022
In algorithmic bureaucracies, there is a continued increase in use of semi- and fully automated AADM characterized by shared decision authority between public servants and automated decision-systems.
“In those bureaucracies we see a continued increase in use of semi and fully automated AADM characterized by shared forms of decision authority between public servants and automated decision-systems (Roehl, 2022).”
From Inside algorithmic bureaucracy: Disentangling automated decision-making and good administration (2025) · cites this paper as Roehl, 2022
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 63 · Cited by 26
- Authors
- Roehl, U. B. U.
- Venue
- Progress in IS
- Publisher
- Springer International Publishing
- Published
- 2022
- Pages
- 35-63
- ISSN
- 2196-8705 (ISSN-L)
- 2196-8713
- OpenAlex
- W4226129311
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 50.83
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Progress in IS (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Keywords
- automated decision-making, administrative decisions, public sector, ideal types, algorithmic decision-making, public sector employees, decision-making power, public service delivery, information system design, management practices
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
