Decision Support Systems, Social Justice and Algorithmic Accountability in Social Work: A New Challenge

References

• Aidinoff, M. 2017. Stop Blaming the Algorithm! Some Paths Forward on the Question of Algorithmic Accountability. Internet Policy Research Initiative, MIT. Accessed October 2017. https://internetpolicy.mit.edu/blog-2017-algorithms-accountable/
   Google Scholar
• Allegheny County. 2017. Allegheny Family Screening Tool: Frequently-asked questions. Pennsylvania: Allegheny County Department of Human Services. Accessed October 2017. https://www.alleghenycountyanalytics.us/index.php/2017/07/20/frequently-asked-questions-allegheny-family-screening-tool/
   Google Scholar
• Amrit, C., T. Paauw, R. Aly, and M. Lavric. 2017. “Identifying Child Abuse Through Text Mining and Machine Learning.” Expert Systems with Applications 88:1–37. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.06.035.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ananny, M., and K. Crawford. 2016. “Seeing Without Knowing: limitations of the Transparency Ideal and Its Application to Algorithmic Accountability.” New Media & Society. doi: 10.1177/1461444816676645.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BASW 2017. The Code of Ethics for Social Work. British Association of Social Work. Accessed March 2018. https://www.basw.co.uk/resource/?id=501
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, D., and K. Crawford. 2011. Six Provocations for Big Data. Accessed 30 January 2019. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1926431
   Google Scholar
• Binns, R. 2017. “Algorithmic Accountability and Public Reason.” Philosophy and Technology 31:1–14. doi: 10.1007/s13347-017-0263-5.
   Google Scholar
• CARE 2012. Vulnerable Children: Can Administrative Data Be Used to Identify Children at Risk of Adverse Outcomes? Centre for Applied Research in Economics, University of Auckland. Accessed June 2014. www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/research/vulnerable-children/auckland-university-can-administrative-data-be-used-to-identify-children-at-risk-of-adverse-outcome.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Chicago Herald Tribune. 6/12/2017. Data Mining Program Designed to Predict Child Abuse Proves Unreliable, DCFS says. Accessed 30 January 2019. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/watchdog/ct-dcfs-eckerd-met-20171206-story.html
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, K. 2013. The Hidden Biases in Big Data. Accessed 30 January 2019. http://blogs.hbr.org/2013/04/the-hidden-biases-in-big-data/
   Google Scholar
• Cuccaro-Alamin, S., R. Foust, R. Vaithianathan, and E. Putnam-Hornstein. 2017. “Risk Assessment and Decision Making in Child Protective Services: Predictive Risk Modeling in Context.” Children and Youth Services Review 79: 291–298. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.06.027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dare, T. 2013. Predictive Risk Modelling and Child Maltreatment: An Ethical Review. Accessed May 2015. http://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/research/predictive-modelling/00-predicitve-risk-modelling-and-child-maltreatment-an-ethical-review.pdf
   Google Scholar
• de Haan, I., and M. Connolly. 2014. “Another Pandora's Box? Some Pros and Cons of Predictive Risk Modelling.” Children and Youth Services Review 47 (1): 86–91. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.07.016.
   Google Scholar
• Fitch, D. 2006. “Examination of the Child Protective Services Decision-Making Context with Implications for Decision Support System Design.” Journal of Social Service Research 34 (4): 117–134.
   Google Scholar
• Fitch, D. 2007. “Structural Equation Modelling the Use of a Risk Assessment Instrument in Child Protective Services.” Decision Support Systems 42 (4): 2137–2152. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2006.05.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foster, K.A., and A.R. Stiffman. 2009. “Child Welfare Workers’ Adoption of Decision Support Technology.” Journal of Technology in Human Services 27 (2): 106–126.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gillingham, P. 2015. “Implementing electronic information systems in human service organizations: the challenge of categorization.” Practice: Social Work in Action 27 (3): 163–175.
   Google Scholar
• Gillingham, P. 2016. “Predictive risk modelling to prevent child maltreatment and other adverse outcomes for service users: inside the “black box” of machine learning.” The British Journal of Social Work 46 (4): 1044–1058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillingham, P. 2017. “Predictive risk modelling to prevent child maltreatment: insights and implications from Aoteaora/New Zealand.” Journal of Public Child Welfare 11 (2): 150–165.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillingham, P., and T. Graham. 2016. “Designing electronic information systems for the future: facing the challenge of New Public Management.” Critical Social Policy 36 (2): 187–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keddell, E. 2015. “The Ethics of Predictive Risk Modelling in the Aotearoa/New Zealand Child Welfare Context: Child Abuse Prevention or Neo-liberal Tool?” Critical Social Policy 35 (1): 69–88. doi: 10.1177/0261018314543224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacFadden, R.J., and D. Schoech. 2010. “Neuroscience, the Unconscious and Professional Decision Making: Implications for ICT.” Journal of Technology in Human Services 28 (4): 282–294.
   Google Scholar
• Maciejewski, M. 2017. “To Do More, Better, Faster and More Cheaply: Using Big Data in Public Administration.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 83 (1_suppl): 120–135. doi: 10.1177/0020852316640058.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Social Development 2014a. Final Report on Feasibility of Using Predictive Risk Modelling. Wellington: Ministry of Social Development. http://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/research/predictive-modelling/00-feasibility-study-report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Social Development 2014b. The Feasibility of Using Predictive Risk Modelling to Identify New-Born Children Who Are High Priority for Preventive Services—Companion Technical Report. Wellington: Ministry of Social Development. Accessed September 2016. http://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/research/predictive-modelling/00-feasibility-study-report-technical-companion.pdf
   Google Scholar
• NASW 2017a. Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. Accessed October 2017. https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English
   Google Scholar
• NASW 2017b. NASW, ASWB, CSWE & CSWA Standards for Technology in Practice. Accessed 30 January 2019. https://www.socialworkers.org/includes/newIncludes/homepage/PRA-BRO-33617.TechStandards_FINAL_POSTING.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Russell, J. 2015. “Predictive Analytics and Child Protection: Constraints and Opportunities.” Child Abuse & Neglect 46: 182–189. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.05.022.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoech, D., H. Jennings, LL. Schkade, and C. Hooper-Russell. 1985. “Expert Systems: Artificial intelligence for professional decisions.” Computers in Human Services 1 (1): 81–115.
   Google Scholar
• Shardlow, S. 1998. “Values, Ethics and Social Work”. In Social Work, edited by R. Adams, L. Dominelli, M. Payne and J. Campling, 23–33. London: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Shaw, I., M. Bell, I. Sinclair, P. Sloper, W. Mitchell, P. Dyson, J. Clayden, and J. Rafferty. 2009. “An Exemplary Scheme? An Evaluation of the Integrated Children’s System.” British Journal of Social Work 39 (4): 613–626. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcp040.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• USACM. 2017. Statement on Algorithmic Transparency and Accountability. US Association for Computing Machinery Public Policy Council (USACM). Accessed September 2017. https://www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/public-policy/2017_usacm_statement_algorithms.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vaithianathan, R., T. Maloney, E. Putnam-Hornstein, and N. Jiang. 2013. “Children in the public benefit system at risk of maltreatment: Identification via predictive modelling.” American Journal of Preventative Medicine 45 (3): 354–359.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venables, J., and K. Healy. 2018. “Collaborating with Parents during Intervention with Parental Agreement: Practitioner Perspectives on Procedural Justice.” Child and Family Social Work. doi: 10.1111/cfs.12578.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wijenayake, S., Graham, and T. Christen. 2018. “A Decision Tree Approach to Predicting Recidivism in Domestic Violence”. Big Data Analytics for Social Computing (BDASC) Workshop, held at the Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (PAKDD'18), Melbourne, Australia, June 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Žliobait˙e, I. 2017. “Measuring Discrimination in Algorithmic Decision Making.” Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 31 (4): 1060–1089.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar