Cited by 474Ethics and Social Impacts of AICultural Studies and PostmodernismPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection

Seeing like a market

Open access
Fourcade, Marion, Healy, Kieran·2016·Socio-Economic Review

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

What do markets see when they look at people? Information dragnets increasingly yield huge quantities of individual-level data, which are analyzed to sort and slot people into categories of taste, riskiness or worth. These tools deepen the reach of the market and define new strategies of profit-making. We present a new theoretical framework for understanding their development. We argue that (a) modern organizations follow an institutional data imperative to collect as much data as possible; (b) as a result of the analysis and use of this data, individuals accrue a form of capital flowing from their positions as measured by various digital scoring and ranking methods; and (c) the facticity of these scoring methods makes them organizational devices with potentially stratifying effects. They offer firms new opportunities to structure and price offerings to consumers. For individuals, they create classification situations that identify shared life-chances in product and service markets. We discuss the implications of these processes and argue that they tend toward a new economy of moral judgment, where outcomes are experienced as morally deserved positions based on prior good actions and good tastes, as measured and classified by this new infrastructure of data collection and analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ser/mww033

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • In the case of eBay, reputation is not 'there' to facilitate exchange; rather, reputation is the result of evaluative infrastructure's disclosing, constituting an asset described as 'ubercapital'.

    “In the case of eBay, reputation is not “there” to facilitate exchange; rather, reputation is the result of evaluative infrastructure's disclosing, constituting an asset which Fourcade and Healy (2013;2016) described as “ubercapital”-the form of capital arising from the “digital record” which evaluative infrastructure unfurls.”

    From Evaluative infrastructures: Accounting for platform organization (2017) · cites this paper as Fourcade and Healy, 2016

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fourcade, M., & Healy, K.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Fourcade, Marion
  • Healy, Kieran
Venue
Socio-Economic Review
Published
2016-12-23
Pages
mww033
ISSN
  • 1475-1461 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-147X
OpenAlex
W2562793958
Cited by
474
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 105 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
54.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Socio-Economic Review (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Yale University
  • University of California, Santa Cruz
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Cultural Studies and Postmodernism
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
Keywords
data-driven markets, microdata, classification, stratification, moral judgment, consumer classification, pricing strategy

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