The algorithm at work? Explanation and repair in the enactment of similarity in art data

References

• Ananny, M., & Crawford, K. (2016). Seeing without knowing: Limitations of the transparency ideal and its application to algorithmic accountability. New Media & Society, 20, 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anthony, C. (2018). To question or accept? How status differences influence responses to new epistemic technologies in knowledge work. Academy of Management Review, 43(4), 661–679.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barley, S. R. (1986). Technology as an occasion for structuring: Evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(1), 78–108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bechky, B. A. (2003). Object lessons: Workplace artifacts as representations of occupational jurisdiction. American Journal of Sociology, 109(3), 720–752.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beunza, D., & Stark, D. (2003). The organization of responsiveness: Innovation and recovery in the trading rooms of lower Manhattan. Socio-Economic Review, 1(2), 135–164.
   Google Scholar
• Bougon, M. G. (1992). Congregate cognitive maps: A unified dynamic theory of organization and strategy. Journal of Management Studies, 29(3), 369–387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucher, T. (2017). The algorithmic imaginary: Exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 30–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burrell, J. (2016). How the machine ‘thinks’: Understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data & Society, 3(1), 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christin, A. (2017). Algorithms in practice: Comparing web journalism and criminal justice. Big Data & Society, 4(2), 1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, H. M. (1990). Artificial experts: Social knowledge and intelligent machines. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, H. M. (1996). Embedded or embodied? A review of Hubert Dreyfus’ what computers still can’t do. Artificial Intelligence, 80(1), 99–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dourish, P. (2016). Algorithms and their others: Algorithmic culture in context. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, P. N. (2010). A vast machine: Computer models, climate data, and the politics of global warming. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, M. S., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1240–1253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forsythe, D. E. (1993). Engineering knowledge: The construction of knowledge in artificial intelligence. Social Studies of Science, 23(3), 445–477.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fourcade, M., & Healy, K. (2017). Categories all the way down. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 42(1 (159)), 286–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, S. J. (2014). Rethinking repair. In T. Gillespie, P. J. Boczkowski, & K. A. Foot (Eds.), Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society (pp. 221–239). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Karpik, L. (2010). Valuing the unique: The economics of singularities. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• MacKenzie, D. (2015). Mechanizing the merc: The Chicago mercantile exchange and the rise of high-frequency trading. Technology and Culture, 56(3), 646–675.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Neyland, D., & Möllers, N. (2017). Algorithmic IF … THEN rules and the conditions and consequences of power. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 45–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W. J., & Gash, D. C. (1994). Technological frames: Making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2), 174–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V. (2014). What happens when evaluation goes online? Exploring apparatuses of valuation in the travel sector. Organization Science, 25(3), 868–891.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Poon, M. (2007). Scorecards as devices for consumer credit: The case of fair, Isaac & Company incorporated. The Sociological Review, 55(S2), 284–306.
   Google Scholar
• Sachs, S. E. The production of difference: Standardization through the creation and control of difference in team practice. Unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Seaver, N. (2013). Knowing algorithms. Media in Transition, 8, 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Seaver, N. (2017). Algorithms as culture: Some tactics for the ethnography of algorithmic systems. Big Data & Society, 4(2), 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seaver, N. (2018). What should an anthropology of algorithms do? Cultural Anthropology, 33(3), 375–385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Star, S. L., & Strauss, A. (1999). Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 8(1), 9–30.
   Google Scholar
• Tufekci, Z. (2015). Algorithmic harms beyond Facebook and Google: Emergent challenges of computational agency. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13, 203–217.
   Google Scholar
• Ziewitz, M. (2016). Governing algorithms: Myth, mess, and methods. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(1), 3–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar