The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Occluded algorithms
Open accessAbstract
Two definitions of algorithm, their uses, and their implied models of computing in society, are reviewed. The first, termed the structural programming definition, aligns more with usage in computer science, and as the name suggests, the intellectual project of structured programming. The second, termed the systemic definition, is more informal and emerges from ethnographic observations of discussions of software in both professional and everyday settings. Specific examples of locating algorithms within modern codebases are shared, as well as code directly impacting social and ethical concerns. The structural distinction between algorithms and social concerns is explained as mirroring the engineering construct of algorithms and data structures. It is proposed that, rather than this separation being an attempt to enforce a professional boundary and evade social responsibility, it is a crucial technical distinction within code which makes it clearer and more transparent. The power structures reinforced by the broader, cultural interpretations of algorithm are reconsidered, along with what it would mean for software to have an inclusive design culture.
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
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.
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
The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate
Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/2053951716679679 · Cited by 4,567 · cited 3×
“A number of authors, including Dourish (2016: 2–3), Mittelstadt et al. (2016: 2), and Yeung (2018: 3–4) have recognized that differing interpretations of algorithm exist, some more aligned with computer science, some with social science and public policy.”
BackgroundAlgorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation
Yeung, K. (2018) · Regulation & Governance · doi:10.1111/rego.12158 · Cited by 842
Allen, J. E., Guinn, C. I., & Horvtz, E. (1999) · IEEE Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1109/5254.796083 · Cited by 442
Algorithms, Governance, and Governmentality: On Governing Academic Writing
Introna, L. D. (2016) · Science, Technology, & Human Values · doi:10.1177/0162243915587360 · Cited by 339
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- Abadi M, 2016, OSDI, 16, 265
- 10.1145/355592.365646 · DOI
- Citron DK, 2014, Washington Law Review, 89, 1
- Cockburn A, 2002, Agile Software Development. (Vol. 177)
- 10.1177/2053951716665128 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1109/JRPROC.1953.274276 · DOI
- 10.1145/1008328.1008329 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10676-010-9233-7 · DOI
- 10.2307/j.ctt1pwt9w5 · DOI · Paper page
- Seaver N, 2017, Big Data & Society, 4, 1, 10.1177/2053951717738104 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.14506/ca33.3.04 · DOI
- 10.2307/j.ctvc77mp9.30 · DOI
- Yourdon EN, 1979, Classics in Software Engineering
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Algorithmic management in a work context
Jarrahi, M. H., Newlands, G., Lee, M. K., Wolf, C. T., Kinder, E., & Sutherland, W. (2021) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/20539517211020332 · Cited by 532
“In terms of technical opacity, a frequent concern around algorithmic management is the opaque or “black box” character AI systems (Burke, 2019).”
BackgroundStreet-Level Algorithms and AI in Bureaucratic Decision-Making: A Caseworker Perspective
Ammitzbøll Flügge, A., Hildebrandt, T., & Møller, N. H. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3449114 · Cited by 83
Metadata
- Authors
- Burke, A.
- Affiliations
- New Centre of Research and Practice, Grand Rapids, USA
- Corresponding author
- Burke, Adam
- ORCID
- Burke, Adam
- Venue
- Big Data & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-07
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 205395171985874
- ISSN
- 2053-9517 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4243767038
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9
- FWCI
- 5.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Big Data & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
- Keywords
- algorithms, structured programming, power structures, inclusive design, data structures, software ethics
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
