Cited by 62Ethics and Social Impacts of AIPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionDigitalization, Law, and Regulation

Automated Decision-Making and Big Data: Concerns for People With Mental Illness

Monteith, Scott, Glenn, Tasha·2016·Current Psychiatry Reports

Abstract

Automated decision-making by computer algorithms based on data from our behaviors is fundamental to the digital economy. Automated decisions impact everyone, occurring routinely in education, employment, health care, credit, and government services. Technologies that generate tracking data, including smartphones, credit cards, websites, social media, and sensors, offer unprecedented benefits. However, people are vulnerable to errors and biases in the underlying data and algorithms, especially those with mental illness. Algorithms based on big data from seemingly unrelated sources may create obstacles to community integration. Voluntary online self-disclosure and constant tracking blur traditional concepts of public versus private data, medical versus non-medical data, and human versus automated decision-making. In contrast to sharing sensitive information with a physician in a confidential relationship, there may be numerous readers of information revealed online; data may be sold repeatedly; used in proprietary algorithms; and are effectively permanent. Technological changes challenge traditional norms affecting privacy and decision-making, and continued discussions on new approaches to provide privacy protections are needed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11920-016-0746-6

Cites

97 of 97 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Human-induced bias is intentionally or unintentionally written by the developers because individuals are always influenced by their own moral perceptions and relevant interests, which affects data training.

    “Human-induced bias is intentionally or unintentionally written by the developers because individuals are always influenced by their own moral perceptions and relevant interests, which affects data training”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 103 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Monteith, S., & Glenn, T.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Corresponding author
Monteith, Scott
Venue
Current Psychiatry Reports
Published
2016-10-25
Volume
18
Issue
12
Pages
112-112
ISSN
  • 1523-3812 (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-1645
OpenAlex
W2532214630
Cited by
62
References
103
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5
FWCI
1.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Psychiatry Reports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
Keywords
automated decision-making, big data, mental illness, algorithmic bias, tracking data, online self-disclosure, privacy, data sharing, social reintegration, algorithmic transparency, digital economy
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Mental Disorders, Decision Making, Computer-Assisted, Humans, Privacy

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