Algorithmic domination in the gig economy

Muldoon, James; Raekstad, Paul

doi:10.1177/14748851221082078

Cited by 35 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent research has used more general terms for the role of algorithms at platforms like Deliveroo. For example, Muldoon and Raekstad ( 2022 ) use the concept of “algorithmic domination” to refer to the “dominating effects of algorithms used as tools of worker control.” They argue that “bosses can employ systems of algorithmic domination to control a more flexible labor force.”…”

Section: Artificial Intelligence As Technology Of Workplace Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first struggle at Deliveroo in London was organized in response to the platform moving away from payment per hour to only payment by drop (Waters and Woodcock, 2017 ). Muldoon and Raekstad ( 2022 ) consider this in terms of “dynamic pricing”, but the focus quickly returns to the role of algorithms. There is a long history of piece rates being used in many industries, which can provide a challenge, but have definitely not prevented workers collectively organizing.…”

Section: Artificial Intelligence As Technology Of Workplace Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Artificial intelligence at work: The problem of managerial control from call centers to transport platforms

Woodcock

2022

Front. Artif. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been much recent research on the topic of artificial intelligence at work, which is increasingly featuring in more types of work and across the labor process. Much research takes the application of artificial intelligence, in its various forms, as a break from the previous methods of organizing work. Less is known about how these applications of artificial intelligence build upon previous forms of managerial control or are adapted in practice. This paper aims to situate the use of artificial intelligence by management within a longer history of control at work. In doing so, it seeks to draw out the novelty of the technology, while also critically appraising the impact of artificial intelligence as a managerial tool. The aim is to understand the contest at work over the introduction of these tools, taking call centers and transport platforms as case studies. Call centers are important because they have been a site of struggle over previous forms of electronic surveillance and computation control, providing important lessons for how artificial intelligence is, or may, be used in practice. In particular, this paper will draw out moments and tactics in algorithmic management has been challenged at work, using this as a discussion point for considering the possible future of artificial intelligence at work.

show abstract

Section: Artificial Intelligence As Technology Of Workplace Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Artificial Intelligence As Technology Of Workplace Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial intelligence at work: The problem of managerial control from call centers to transport platforms

Woodcock

2022

Front. Artif. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Where suggestions depart from classic liberal perspectives, they often continue to adopt a negative perspective of freedom. The recent republican revival and its attested potential for theorizing the digital realm are a case in point (Thiel 2017;Muldoon and Raekstad 2022;Fischli 2022). Neo-republicans conceptualize freedom as non-domination, which requires not just the absence of interference, but also the ability to do so (Pettit 1997(Pettit , 2012Hoye and Monaghan 2018).…”

Section: Negative Freedom: Non-interference and The Absence Of Constr...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Freedom –Opening up the Debate

Fischli¹,

Beschorner²

2022

Morals & Machines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper contributes to the normative analysis of digital technologies and data-driven practices by broadening the analytical perspective on freedom. Many contemporary discussions of the digital context tend to operate with a relatively narrow conception of freedom, which centers on the absence of interference. While this approach is in line with liberalism’s on-going paradigmatic standing in much of the Western world, we argue that digital theorists have much to gain from opening their discussions to social and positive conceptions of freedom. Drawing on the work of Axel Honneth and John Christman, we show how such a change in perspective gives rise to new considerations for freedom in the digital context, such as collective self-determination, capabilities, and mutual recogni- tion. Building on these ideas, we sketch three demands that follow from such an inclusive conception of freedom: empowering people via new forms of political participation, increasing diversity and collective awareness in the digital industry, as well as using progressive political regulation to unleash digital technology’s social potential.

show abstract

“…If individuals are algorithmically ranked as health risks, they would be soon charged higher insurance premiums (Citron & Pasquale, 2014, 4). If Uber drivers have relatively low scores, they can be immediately punished by the algorithmdriven platform which can restrict the numbers of passengers they receive, or even eventually remove the drivers from the platform (Chan, 2019;O'Connor, 2022;Muldoon & Raekstad, 2022). With these punishments, not only are these scoring systems used for the powerful entities to make relevant decisions about individuals, but the individuals themselves are also subject to disciplinary process by means of algorithmic transparency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transparency as Manipulation? Uncovering the Disciplinary Power of Algorithmic Transparency

Wang

2022

Philos. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Automated algorithms are silently making crucial decisions about our lives, but most of the time we have little understanding of how they work. To counter this hidden influence, there have been increasing calls for algorithmic transparency. Much ink has been spilled over the informational account of algorithmic transparency—about how much information should be revealed about the inner workings of an algorithm. But few studies question the power structure beneath the informational disclosure of the algorithm. As a result, the information disclosure itself can be a means of manipulation used by a group of people to advance their own interests. Instead of concentrating on information disclosure, this paper examines algorithmic transparency from the perspective of power, explaining how algorithmic transparency under a disciplinary power structure can be a technique of normalizing people’s behavior. The informational disclosure of an algorithm can not only set up some de facto norms, but also build a scientific narrative of its algorithm to justify those norms. In doing so, people would be internally motivated to follow those norms with less critical analysis. This article suggests that we should not simply open the black box of an algorithm without challenging the existing power relations.

show abstract

Algorithmic domination in the gig economy

Cited by 35 publications

References 49 publications

Artificial intelligence at work: The problem of managerial control from call centers to transport platforms

Artificial intelligence at work: The problem of managerial control from call centers to transport platforms

Digital Freedom –Opening up the Debate

Transparency as Manipulation? Uncovering the Disciplinary Power of Algorithmic Transparency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About