The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Transparent to whom? No algorithmic accountability without a critical audience
Open accessAbstract
Big data and data science transform organizational decision-making. We increasingly defer decisions to algorithms because machines have earned a reputation of outperforming us. As algorithms become embedded within organizations, they become more influential and increasingly opaque. Those who create algorithms may make arbitrary decisions in all stages of the ‘data value chain’, yet these subjectivities are obscured from view. Algorithms come to reflect the biases of their creators, can reinforce established ways of thinking, and may favour some political orientations over others. This is a cause for concern and calls for more transparency in the development, implementation, and use of algorithms in public- and private-sector organizations. We argue that one elementary – yet key – question remains largely undiscussed. If transparency is a primary concern, then to whom should algorithms be transparent? We consider algorithms as socio-technical assemblages and conclude that without a critical audience, algorithms cannot be held accountable.
Overview
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
Figures
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Crucially, a meaningful account cannot be given unless the forum can understand and critically engage with the subject matter [37,75].”
From Reviewable Automated Decision-Making: A Framework for Accountable Algorithmic Systems (2021) · cites this paper as [37]
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
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810 · cited 1×
“In statistics and economics, the cognitive biases of people (e.g. con fi r-mation bias) and analytical pitfals (e.g. selection bias) have been subject of inquiry for many decades and are relatively well understood (see Tversky & Kahneman, 1974).”
null (2016) · Philosophy Study · doi:10.17265/2159-5313/2016.09.003 · Cited by 28,317
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship
Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., Blomberg, N., Boiten, J.-W., da Silva Santos, L. B., Bourne, P. E., et al. (2016) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18 · Cited by 18,423 · cited 3×
“The FAIR acronym refers to data management that is Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (Wilkinson, 2016, p. 4; Wilkinson et al., 2017, p. 3): Findable ‒ data should be identi fi ed using globally unique, resolvable, and persistent identi fi ers, and should include machine-actionable…”
MethodBusiness intelligence and analytics: from big data to big impact
Chen, H., Chiang, R. H. L., & Storey, V. C. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41703503 · Cited by 6,250
(2023) · doi:10.1126/science · Cited by 6,063
Beyond the hype: Big data concepts, methods, and analytics
Gandomi, A., & Haider, M. (2015) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.10.007 · Cited by 4,226 · cited 1×
“The resulting pervasive collection of data-centric innovations has been subjected to limited academic scrutiny, especially when compared to the dissemination of earlier statistical techniques (Gandomi & Haider, 2015).”
MethodThe Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information
Pasquale, F. (2015) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674736061 · Cited by 3,796
Barocas, S., & Selbst, A. D. (2014) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2477899 · Cited by 3,048 · cited 2×
“Despite the many advantages that these quanti fi cation objects may bring about, concerns have risen about the susceptibility of algorithmic models to human-like bias (Barocas & Selbst, 2016; Caliskan-Islam, Bryson, & Narayanan, 2016; van Doorn, 2017).”
BackgroundSemantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases
Caliskan, A., Bryson, J. J., & Narayanan, A. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aal4230 · Cited by 2,887 · cited 1×
“…can learn to adopt similar discriminatory attitudes based on words associated with a particular gender or social group (Barocas & Selbst, 2016; Caliskan, Bryson, & Narayanan, 2017) ‒ similarly, algorithmic models have been demonstrated to potentially reproduce racialized and sex-ualized…”
Background
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- 10.15779/Z38BG31 · DOI · Paper page
- Bodó B., 2017, Yale Journal of Law & Technology, 19, 133
- 10.1126/science.aal4230 · DOI · Paper page
- Cloninger C., 2013, Slave to the algorithm., 16
- 10.17265/2159-5313/2016.09.003 · DOI · Paper page
- Knoespe K. J., 2008, Théorie, Littérature, Epistémologie, 25, 235
- Lazer D., 2014, Policy Forum, 343, 1203
- Macpherson N., 2013, Review of quality assurance of government models
- Manon H., 2011, World Picture, 6, 1
- Minsky M. L., 1965, Proceedings of International Federation of Information Processing Congress, 1, 45
- Miyazaki S., 2012, Computational Culture, 2
- 10.17265/2159-5313/2016.09.003 · DOI · Paper page
- Sandvig C., 2014, Paper presented to Data and Discrimination: Converting Critical Concerns into Productive Inquiry
- Seaver N., 2013, Media in Transition, 8, 1
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–259 of 259
Norman, S. R. (2020) · ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania)
The use of multiple models within an organisationPreprint
Dent, C. J., Goldstein, M., Wright, A. J., & Wynn, H. P. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2008.11813
Background of Algorithmic Government
Gupta, R., & Pal, S. K. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-16-0282-5_2
Transparency in Predictive Algorithms: A Judicial PerspectivePreprint
Malek, A. (2021) · doi:10.31124/advance.14699937.v2
Tippett, C. (2021) · IUI Workshops
Thorpe, D., Fouyaxis, J., Lipschitz, J. M., Nielson, A., Li, W., Murphy, S. A., & Bidargaddi, N. P. (2022) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/29988
“However, the solution in both cases lies on a middle ground; solutions can be developed through new models with transparent collaboration and through the development of a critical audience capable of engaging with these digital realities in a reflexive and an ongoing manner [7,20,24].”
Background(2021) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/978-1-80117-620-020211015
Transparency in Predictive Algorithms: A Judicial PerspectivePreprint
Malek, A. (2021) · doi:10.31124/advance.14699937
Ausloos, J. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.003.0009
Ausloos, J. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.003.0001
Ausloos, J. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.003.0006
DEMOCRACY AND RULE OF LAW IN THE ERA OF ALGORITHMS: A REVIEW ON INTERNET SHUTDOWNS IN INDIA
Shindhe, A. R. (2023) · Towards Excellence · doi:10.37867/te150245
Planners navigating platform urbanism
Klein, L. (2023) · doi:10.32920/24084777.v1
A A privacidade e os dados pessoais na Ciência da Informação
da Conceição, G. C., & Nhacuongue, J. A. (2023) · Liinc em Revista · doi:10.18617/liinc.v19i2.6471
Mougdir, S. (2023) · International Journal on Data Science and Technology · doi:10.11648/j.ijdst.20230903.11
AI Adoption to Innovate Accounting Practice
Napolitano, G. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Metrology for eXtended Reality, Artificial Intelligence and Neural Engineering (MetroXRAINE) · doi:10.1109/metroxraine58569.2023.10405760
“…and information science researchers have to collaborate with data scientists to find theoretical frameworks and choose the consequent adequate algorithmic solutions [5;6], including information-theoretical concerns with regard to the data needed and how to guarantee a widespread diffusion of AI.”
BackgroundNemitz, P. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.002.0005
Ausloos, J. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.002.0012
Ausloos, J. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.002.0009
Ausloos, J. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.002.0010
Kuner, C., & Greenleaf, G. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.002.0006
Ausloos, J. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.002.0004
Ausloos, J. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198847977.002.0011
The Consequences of Visibility and Opaqueness for Platform Workers
Seppänen, L. (2024) · Pro Publico Bono - Magyar Közigazgatás · doi:10.32575/ppb.2024.1.8
Bova, P. (2024) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-74679-6_28
Leaving (Operational) Human Resource Management to Artificial Intelligence
Tursunbayeva, A. (2024) · Contributions to management science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-75266-7_4
Governance der Online-Kommunikation
Puppis, M., & Donges, P. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-18017-1_5-2
Constituting Algorithmic Accountability
Johnson, D. G. (2025) · Philosophy of engineering and technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-87974-6_2
Tackling AI Transparency Concerns in Biomedical Research
Arzuaga, L. S. (2025) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781032634487-12
Wang, Y., & Schwinges, A. (2026) · Journal of Communication Management · doi:10.1108/jcom-04-2026-0145
The impact of social media usage on algorithmic literacy among Chinese adults
Ren, Y., & Jiang, S. (2025) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2025.2557558
“Algorithmic literacy protects individuals from algorithmic risks (Gran et al., 2020; Kemper & Kolkman, 2019) and enables critical engagement, particularly in social media, where algorithms shape user experiences.”
Artificial Intelligence and Political Trust
Fink‐Hafner, D., & Kaišić, K. (2025) · Politics in Central Europe · doi:10.2478/pce-2025-0014
Explaining explainable AI for healthcare: a Q-methodology study
Howe, S., Horbach, D., van Rijn, L., Gaff, M., van Exel, J. N. A., & Wehrens, R. (2025) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2025.2584148
“XAI can influence trust, acceptability, legitimacy, and likelihood of adoption (Arbelaez Ossa et al., 2022; Kemper & Kolkman, 2019; Licht & Licht, 2020; Aniek F Markus et al., 2021).”
Paz, C. D. (2025) · IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS) · doi:10.1109/istas65609.2025.11269665
“This concept was highly associated with principles of accountability[33] and transparency[36].”
Digitalization and Human Rights
Joseph, J. (2025) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-3685-5.ch002
Responsible data science: impartiality, accuracy, confidentiality and transparency of data
Andrade, M. C., Gonçalez, P. R. V. A., Berti Junior, D. W., Baptista, A. A., & Coneglian, C. S. (2020) · Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT)
Pandey, P. K., Pandey, P. K., Iyer, S. S., & Ouaissa, M. (2026) · World sustainability series · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-13638-1_20
Unfolding the Ethical and Philosophical Implications of AI in Shaping Human-Centered Fields
Nisha, A. R., Subramani, A. K., & Harini, S. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-3436-3.ch018
The Risk of Manipulation and Deception in sXAI
Alpsancar, S., & Klenk, M. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-5290-7_30
All you need is…. justification: algorithmic justifiability trumps transparency
Muralidharan, A., & Savulescu, J. (2026) · Ethics and Information Technology · doi:10.1007/s10676-026-09892-3
“Justifiable AI thus leaves us no less informed about the intentions and motivations of the AI user than explainable or interpretable AI.”
Modèles prédictifs & raisonnement avec les explications
Boumazouza, R. (2022) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/e74c615fz12cbz4425z8bc7z8f651a87f9d8
Scheuerman, M. K., Hutiri, W. T., Rahmattalabi, A., Matthews, V., Xiang, A., & Andrews, J. T. A. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790364 · Cited by 1
“Rather, transparency shifts information asymmetries towards or away specific stakeholders, enabling them to take specific actions [79, 115, 199].”
Luna, J. (2026) · Humanities and Social Sciences · doi:10.11648/j.hss.20261402.19
Stepping Into the Black Box: Opening Up LLMs to Public Exploration Through Discursive Design
Immel, S., Rajani, N., Verweij, R., Li, J., Nissen, B., Soares, L. L., & Taylor, A. S. (2026) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3800645.3812976
“To further open up opaque technologies to a “critical audience” [41], we propose experiential learning techniques—namely seeing as and being —as a promising direction for publicly engaged research-through-design into AI literacy.”
The Paradox of ‘Algorithmic’ Accountability and its Implications for Design
Ramesh, D., Parthasarathy, S., & Banović, N. (2026) · ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT) · doi:10.1145/3805689.3812374
Navigating the Grey Zone: Sustainable AI Governance and Leadership in SMEs
Finta, K., Utassy, L., Horváth, K. G., & Fűrész, Á. (2026) · doi:10.18690/um.epf.7.2026.36
AI and the Automation of Economic Crimes: Ethical and Legal Challenges
Atul, N. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-20889-7_6
Cho, B.-C., & Ahn, S. (2026) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-026-10775-7
Algoritmik Anlatılar ve Şeffaflık Sorunu: Yapay Zeka Çağında Kamu Yayıncılığının Yeni Sorumlulukları
Yavuz, V. (2026) · İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi · doi:10.47998/ikad.1937031
Schwinges, A., Marschlich, S., Kroon, A. C., Cools, H., & Eisele, O. (2026) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2026.2715572
Bao, P., Zhao, Q., & Luo, Y. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.7267497
Toward non-textual representation of social anthropology
Peponakis, M., Kapidakis, S., Doerr, M., & Tountasaki, E. (2026) · Journal of Digital Social Research · doi:10.33621/jdsr.v8i157767
“In this way, algorithms reflect the bias of their creators and may impose certain preferences or positions against alternative options (Kemper and Kolkman 2018).”
Dai modelli contabili ai sistemi algoritmici. Implicazioni per l’Economia aziendale
Massaro, M., Mas, F. D., & Bagnoli, C. (2026) · doi:10.30687/979-12-5742-081-9/012
“Unprecedented Injustice”: network determinism in the Dutch digital welfare state
Huyskes, D. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-026-01350-6
Fridayani, H. D. (2026) · Administrative Theory & Praxis · doi:10.1080/10841806.2026.2732526
Algorithmic Empowerment: The Fair Allocation of Visibility in Platformized Publics
Kwok, C. (2026) · Media Technology and Governance · doi:10.1177/29777984261494012
Jiang, L., & Luan, B. (2026) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.3390/jtaer21100359
Who gets to verify AI? Provenance, authority and accountability in digital governmentPreprint
Wang, S., Wei, S., Li, P., Chan, S.-K., & Liu, Y. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10445068/v1
Rahim, F. A., Noor, N. S. M., Hasan, W. H. W., Saman, F. I., & Talib, A. N. (2026) · International Journal of Innovation and Industrial Revolution · doi:10.35631/ijirev.826054
Metadata
- Authors
- Kemper, J., & Kolkman, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Eindhoven University of Technology (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Kemper, Jakko
- Venue
- Information, Communication & Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-06-18
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 2081-2096
- ISSN
- 1369-118X (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4462
- OpenAlex
- W2809386502
- Cited by
- 260
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 54.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Information Communication & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
- Keywords
- algorithmic accountability, algorithmic transparency, critical audiences, algorithmic decision-making, algorithmic bias, data value chain, sociotechnical assemblages, organizational decision-making, big data, political orientation, public and private institutions
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
