Decision support and algorithmic support: the construction of algorithms and professional discretion in social work

References

• Alkhatib, A., & Bernstein, M. (2019, May 4–9). Street-level algorithms: A theory at the gaps between policy and decisions. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ’19) ACM, Glasgow, Scotland, UK. Article 530, pp. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300760
   Google Scholar
• Bovens, M., & Zouridis, S. (2002). From street-level to system-level bureaucracies: How information and communication technology is transforming administrative discretion and constitutional control. Public Administration Review, 62(2), 174–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00168
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out. Classification and its consequences. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A., Chouldechova, A., Putnam-Hornstein, E., Tobin, A., & Vaithianathan, R. (2019, May). Toward algorithmic accountability in public services: A qualitative study of affected community perspectives on algorithmic decision-making in child welfare services. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–12).
   Google Scholar
• Buffat, A. (2015). Street-level bureaucracy and e-government. Public Management Review, 17(1), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.771699
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton, J., & Van den Broek, D. (2009). Accountable and countable: Information management systems and the bureaucratization of social work. British Journal of Social Work, 39(7), 1326–1342. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcn027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busch, P. A., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2018). Digital discretion: A systematic literature review of ICT and street-level discretion. Information Polity, 23(1), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-170050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busch, P. A., Henriksen, H. Z., & Sæbø, Ø. (2018). Opportunities and challenges of digitized discretionary practices: A public service worker perspective. Government Information Quarterly, 35(4), 547–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, A. E. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Coulthard, B., Mallett, J., & Taylor, B. (2020). Better decisions for children with “Big data”: Can algorithms promote fairness, transparency, and parental engagement? Societies, 10(97). https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10040097
   Google Scholar
• Dearman, P. (2005). Computerized social casework recording: Autonomy and control in Australia’s income support agency. Labor Studies Journal, 30(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160449X0503000104
   Google Scholar
• Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, T. (2011). Professionals, managers and discretion: Critiquing street-level bureaucracy. British Journal of Social Work, 41(2), 368–386. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcq074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, T., & Harris, J. (2004). Street-level bureaucracy, social work and the (exaggerated) death of discretion. British Journal of Social Work, 34(6), 871–895. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bch106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillingham, P. (2009). The use of assessment tools in child protection: An ethnomethodological study [PhD dissertation]. University of Melbourne.
   Google Scholar
• Gillingham, P. (2019). Can predictive algorithms assist decision-making in social work with children and families? Child Abuse Review, 28(2), 114–126. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2547
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (1995). The active interview. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Høybye-Mortensen, M. (2015). Decision-making tools and their influence on caseworker’s room for discretion. British Journal of Social Work, 45(2), 600–615. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bct144
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jorna, F., & Wagenaar, P. (2007). The ‘iron cage’ strengthened? Discretion and digital discipline. Public Administration, 85(1), 189–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00640.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jørgensen, A. M., Webb, C., Keddell, E., & Ballantyne, N. (2021). Three roads to Rome? Comparative policy analysis of preditive tools in child protection services in Aotearoa New Zealand, England, and Denmark. Nordic Social Work Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2021.1999846
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (1992). Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts. In W. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology / building society: Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 225–258). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: The dilemmas of the individual in public service. Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Lund, C. S. (2019). Algoritmer i social faglige vurderinger – en undersøgelse af socialarbejderes opfattelse af at anvende algoritmer til vurdering af underretninger. Uden for Nummer, 19(39), 20–31. https://socialraadgiverne.dk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/39-UdenForNummer.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Mol, A. (2008). The logic of care: Health and the problem of patient choice. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Morago, P. (2007). Evidence-based practice: From medicine to social work. European Journal of Social Work, 9(4), 461–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691450600958510
   Google Scholar
• Møller, A. M. (2019). Explicit professionalism. A cross-level study of institutional change in the wake of evidence-based practice. Journal of Professions and Organization, 6(2), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joz003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Møller, A. M. (2022). Mobilizing knowledge in frontline work: A conceptual framework and empirical exploration. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 5(1), 50–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvab023
   Google Scholar
• O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown.
   Google Scholar
• Parton, N. (2008). Changes in the form of knowledge in social work: From the ‘social’ to the ‘informational’? The British Journal of Social Work, 38(2), 253–269. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcl337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen, A. C., Christensen, L. R., Harper, R., & Hildebrandt, T. (2021). “We would never write that down”. Classifications of unemployed and data challenges for AI. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449176
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Petersen, A., Christensen, L. R., & Hildebrandt, T. (2020). The role of discretion in the age of automation. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 29(3), 303–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-020-09371-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ponnert, L., & Svensson, K. (2016). Standardisation – the end of professional discretion? European Journal of Social Work, 19(3–4), 586–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2015.1074551
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryle, G. (1945). Knowing how and knowing that: The presidential address. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 46, 1–16. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4544405
   Google Scholar
• Tavory, I., & Timmermans, S. (2014). Abductive analysis: Theorizing qualitative research. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, B. (2012). Models for professional judgement in social work. European Journal of Social Work, 15(4), 546–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2012.702310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, B., & Whittaker, A. (2018). Professional judgement and decision-making in social work. Journal of Social Work Practices, 32(2), 105–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2018.1462780
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Timmermans, S., & Epstein, S. (2010). A world of standards but not a standard world: Toward a sociology of standards and standardization. Annual Review of Sociology, 36(1), 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102629
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ting, M. H., Chu, C. M., Zeng, G., Li, D., & Chng, G. S. (2018). Predicting recidivism among youth offenders: Augmenting professional judgement with machine learning algorithms. Journal of Social Work, 18(6), 631–649. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017317743137
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williamson, B., & Piattoeva, N. (2019). Objectivity as standardization in data–scientific education policy, technology and governance. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(1), 64–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1556215
   Google Scholar