The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Threat of Algocracy: Reality, Resistance and Accommodation
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Another point is that increased used of data, and the translation of all aspects of human action into data is that such quantification by necessity involves multiple stages of human interpretation, challenging the objective veneer of big data-based decision making [21,34,36].”
From A shallow defence of a technocracy of artificial intelligence: Examining the political harms of algorithmic governance in the domain of government (2020) · cites this paper as [36]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Whether we like it or not, algorithms are increasingly being used to nudge, bias, guide, provoke, control, manipulate and constrain human behaviour.”
From Algorithmic governance: Developing a research agenda through the power of collective intelligence (2017) · cites this paper as Danaher, 2016
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In public-law terms, the concern is not only whether AI improves efficiency but also whether algorithmic assistance remains compatible with accountable justification, discretionary control, and rule-of-law legitimacy (Danaher, 2016;Binns, 2018;Busuioc, 2021).”
From From Human Oversight to Cognitive Sovereignty: A Process-Based Governance Standard for AI-Assisted Legal Reasoning (2026) · cites this paper as Danaher, 2016
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In this sense, Cognitive Sovereignty responds to the threat of algocracy: the risk that governance becomes dependent on decision systems whose operation is not meaningfully contestable by the persons subject to them (Danaher, 2016).”
From From Human Oversight to Cognitive Sovereignty: A Process-Based Governance Standard for AI-Assisted Legal Reasoning (2026) · cites this paper as Danaher, 2016
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This may lead to ‘algocracy’, in which ‘the legitimacy of public decision-making processes’ is thwarted by ‘the opacity of certain algocratic governance systems’ (Danaher, 2016).”
From Algorithmic Accountability and Public Reason (2018) · cites this paper as Danaher, 2016
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“were similar to concepts used in the pre-existing literature on the problems of algorithmic governance (e.g. Danaher, 2016; Zarsky, 2016)”
From Algorithmic governance: Developing a research agenda through the power of collective intelligence (2017) · cites this paper as Danaher, 2016
In the citing paper
“For example, as mentioned in [28], 'the human may want to guard against certain kinds of discrimination, and their notion of fairness may be too abstract to be completely encoded into the system'”
From Beyond explainability: justifiability and contestability of algorithmic decision systems (2022) · cites this paper as [28]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Polanyi, M. (1997) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-7506-9718-7.50010-x · Cited by 12,410
Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998) · Analysis · doi:10.1093/analys/58.1.7 · Cited by 6,333 · cited 1×
“Within the philosophy of mind, there is a school of thought that endorses the ‘extended mind thesis’ (Clark & Chalmers 1998; Clark 2010).”
BackgroundThe second machine age: work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies
(2015) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.184834 · Cited by 4,409
Big data: a revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think
(2013) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.50-6804 · Cited by 3,657
(1999) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,259
Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence.
Meehl, P. E. (1954) · University of Minnesota Press eBooks · doi:10.1037/11281-000 · Cited by 2,227
Supersizing the mind: embodiment, action, and cognitive extension
(2009) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.47-0788 · Cited by 2,205
Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension
Clark, A. (2008) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195333213.001.0001 · Cited by 2,201
Superintelligence: paths, dangers, strategies
Bostrom, N. (2015) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.187536 · Cited by 1,998
The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies
Dong, X., & McIntyre, S. H. (2014) · Quantitative Finance · doi:10.1080/14697688.2014.946440 · Cited by 1,759
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Clark, A. (2010). Supersizing the mind. Oxford: OUP.
- Crawford, K., & Schultz, J. (2014). Big data and due process: towards a framework to redress predictive privacy harms. Boston College Law Review, 55, 93.
- Habermas, J. (1990). Discourse ethics: notes on a program of philosophical justification. In Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Trans. Christian Lenhart and Shierry Weber Nicholson. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Pentland, A. (2014). Social Physics. London: Penguin Press
- Seaver, N. (2013). Knowing algorithms. In Media in Transition 8, Cambridge MA
- Zarsky, T. (2013). Transparent prediction. University of Illinois Law Review, 4, 1504.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 501–519 of 519
Digital platforms and political participation: from citizen voice to governance data in China
He, B., & Wu, J. (2026) · Australian Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1080/10361146.2026.2736829
Morgner, C. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-25758-1_1
Medero, G. S. (2026) · Party Politics · doi:10.1177/13540688261492913
Cascaes, F. E. D. M. (2026) · Revista Multidisciplinar do Nordeste Mineiro · doi:10.66104/aczpy604
Political management: routinization of meanings and structural updates
Solovyev, A. (2026) · Полис Политические исследования · doi:10.17976/jpps/2026.05.07
The shift in ethical governance from traditional philosophy to algorithmic decision making
de Marcellis-Warin, N., Melchior, C., & Warin, T. (2026) · Discover Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s44163-026-01974-x
“I AM THE LAW”: JUDGE DREDD AS AN ALLEGORY OF ALGORITHMIC GOVERNANCE AND EPISTEMIC AUTHORITY
Serpil, H. (2026) · The Turkish Online Journal of Design Art and Communication · doi:10.7456/tojdac.1993315
Volodenkov, S. V., & Валентиновна, М. В. (2026) · Journal of Political Research · doi:10.12737/2587-6295-2026-10-3-24-33
Raising Awareness in AIED through Evaluative Judgement: Introducing the Ethics & Pedagogy Workshop
Bergdahl, N., & Edstrand, E. (2026) · Lecture notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-39734-8_28
Endüstri 6.0’a Doğru Algoritmik Yönetişim: Operasyon Kararlarında Yetki, Güven ve Kontrol
Destebaşi, M. İ. (2026) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub1487.c5927
Algoritmik Karar Alma ve Hukuki Sorumluluk
ERDEM, A. (2026) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub1499.c6000
Simon, W. R. (2026) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-026-01211-4
Recognition without obligation: AI, asset position, and the limits of structural explanations
Lee, Y., & Han, S. (2026) · Journal of Information Technology & Politics · doi:10.1080/19331681.2026.2752114
Contreras, R. P. P., Mitcham, C., Zhao, Z., & Zhang, G. (2026) · Global Philosophy · doi:10.1007/s10516-026-09815-3
Tesse, I., Belmkaddem, Z., & Hajjaji, N. E. (2026) · Marché et organisations · doi:10.3917/maorg.pr1.0173
Oliveri, F. (2026) · PRISMA Economia - Società – Lavoro · doi:10.3280/pri2026-001005
Ziarani, M. Z. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-9469-5.ch011
Metadata
- Authors
- Danaher, J.
- Affiliations
- Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE)
- Corresponding author
- Danaher, John
- ORCID
- Danaher, John
- Venue
- Philosophy & Technology
- Published
- 2016-01-09
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 245-268
- ISSN
- 2210-5433 (ISSN-L)
- 2210-5441
- OpenAlex
- W2242985385
- Cited by
- 519
- References
- 72
- Citations by year
- 2026: 85 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 6
- FWCI
- 66.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- philarchive.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Philosophy & Technology (publishedVersion)
- PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
- Keywords
- algocracy, algorithmic governance, algorithmic decision-making, political legitimacy, epistocracy, public decision-making, human participation, social decision-making
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
