Artificial intelligence, types of decisions, and street-level bureaucrats: Evidence from a survey experiment

References

• Barth, T. J., and E. Arnold. 1999. “Artificial Intelligence and Administrative Discretion: Implications for Public Administration.” The American Review of Public Administration 29 (4): 332–351. doi:10.1177/02750749922064463.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bekkers, V., A. Edwards, R. Moody, and H. Beunders. 2011. “Caught by Surprise? Micro-mobilization, New Media and the Management of Strategic Surprises.” Public Management Review 13 (7): 1003–1021. doi:10.1080/14719037.2011.589615.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovens, M., and S. Zouridis. 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. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd, M., and N. Wilson. 2017. “Rapid Developments in Artificial Intelligence: How Might the New Zealand Government Respond?” Policy Quarterly 13 (4): 36–44. doi:10.26686/pq.v13i4.4619.
   Google Scholar
• Brehm, J. O., and S. Gates. 1999. Working, Shirking, and Sabotage: Bureaucratic Response to a Democratic Public. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buffat, A. (2011). Discretionary Power and Accountability of the Office Bureaucracy: The Taxators of a Unemployment Fund as Implementing Actors ( Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Lausanne, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Buffat, A. 2015. “Street-level Bureaucracy and E-government.” Public Management Review 17 (1): 149–161. doi:10.1080/14719037.2013.771699.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bullock, J. 2019. “Artificial Intelligence, Discretion, and Bureaucracy.” The American Review of Public Administration 49 (7): 751–761. doi:10.1177/0275074019856123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bullock, J., M. Young, and Y. F. Wang. 2020. “Artificial Intelligence, Bureaucratic Form, and Discretion in Public Service.” Information Polity Preprint: 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Busch, P. A., and H. Z. Henriksen. 2018. “Digital Discretion: A Systematic Literature Review of ICT and Street-level Discretion.” Information Polity 23 (1): 3–28. doi:10.3233/IP-170050.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busch, P. A., H. Z. Henriksen, and Ø. Sæbø. 2018. “Opportunities and Challenges of Digitized Discretionary Practices: A Public Service Worker Perspective.” Government Information Quarterly 35 (4): 547–556. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cyert, R. M., and J. G. March. 1963. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, K. C. 1969. Discretionary Justice: A Preliminary Inquiry. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• de Boer, N., and N. Raaphorst. 2021. “Automation and Discretion: Explaining the Effect of Automation on How Street-level Bureaucrats Enforce.” Public Management Review 23: 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• de Sousa, W. G., E. R. P. de Melo, P. H. D. S. Bermejo, R. A. S. Farias, and A. O. Gomes. 2019. “How and Where Is Artificial Intelligence in the Public Sector Going? A Literature Review and Research Agenda.” Government Information Quarterly 36 (4): 101392. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2019.07.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eubanks, V. 2018. Automating Inequality: How High-tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018. “Artificial Intelligence for Europe.” In Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the European council, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. Retrieved from Brussels https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/communication-artificial-intelligence-europe
   Google Scholar
• Frey, C. B., and M. A. Osborne. 2017. “The Future of Employment: How Susceptible are Jobs to Computerisation?” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 114: 254–280. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M. 2004. “Beyond Good and Evil in Policy Implementation: Instrument Mixes, Implementation Styles, and Second Generation Theories of Policy Instrument Choice.” Policy and Society 23 (2): 1–17. doi:10.1016/S1449-4035(04)70030-2.
   Google Scholar
• Hupe, P. 2013. “Dimensions of Discretion: Specifying the Object of Street-level Bureaucracy Research.” Der moderne staat–Zeitschrift für Public Policy, Recht und Management 6 (2): 23–24. doi:10.3224/dms.v6i2.10.
   Google Scholar
• Hupe, P., and M. Hill. 2007. “Street Level Bureaucracy and Public Accountability.” Public Administration 85 (2): 279–299. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00650.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, O., S. R. Jilke, and G. G. Van Ryzin, Eds. 2017. Experiments in Public Management Research: Challenges and Contributions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Janssen, M., and G. Kuk. 2016. “The Challenges and Limits of Big Data Algorithms in Technocratic Governance.” Government Information Quarterly 33 (3): 371–377. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2016.08.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinberg, J., H. Lakkaraju, J. Leskovec, J. Ludwig, and S. Mullainathan. 2018. “Human Decisions and Machine Predictions.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 133 (1): 237–293. doi:10.1093/qje/qjx032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, M. K. 2018. “Understanding Perception of Algorithmic Decisions: Fairness, Trust, and Emotion in Response to Algorithmic Management.” Big Data & Society 5 (1): 2053951718756684. doi:10.1177/2053951718756684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipsky, M. 1980. Street-Level Bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Loyens, K. 2015. “Coping with Policy Alienation in Law Enforcement.” In Understanding Street-level Bureaucracy, edited by Hupe Peter, Michael Hill, and Aurelien Buffat, 99–144. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Maynard‐Moody, S., and M. Musheno. 2012. “Social Equities and Inequities in Practice: Street-Level Workers as Agents and Pragmatists.” Public Administration Review 72 (s1): S16–S23. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02633.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metselaar, E. E. 1997. Assessing the willingness to change: Construction and validation of the DINAMO. Doctoral dissertation, Free University of Amsterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Meyers, M. K., and S. Vorsanger. 2003. ““Street-level Bureaucrats and the Implementation of Public Policy”.” In Handbook of Public Administration, edited by G. Peters and J. Pierre, 245–254. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, S. M., and L. R. Keiser. 2021. “Representative Bureaucracy and Attitudes toward Automated Decision Making.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 31 (1): 150–165. doi:10.1093/jopart/muaa019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagtegaal, R. 2021. “The Impact of Using Algorithms for Managerial Decisions on Public Employees’ Procedural Justice.” Government Information Quarterly 38 (1): 101536. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2020.101536.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbett, R. E., C. Caputo, P. Legant, and J. Marecek. 1973. “Behavior as Seen by the Actor and as Seen by the Observer.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 27 (2): 154. doi:10.1037/h0034779.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noble, S. U. 2018. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York, NY: NYU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Polsky, A. J. 1993. The Rise of the Therapeutic State. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Salamon, L. M. 2002. The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1947. Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decisionmaking Processes in Administrative Organizations. Oxford, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1956. “Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment.” Psychological Review 63 (2): 29–138. doi:10.1037/h0042769.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1977. “The Logic of Heuristic Decision Making.“ In Models of Discovery, edited by Simon H. A, 154–175. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1978. “Information-processing Theory of Human Problem Solving.” Handbook of Learning and Cognitive Processes 5: 271–295.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1997. Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decisionmaking Processes in Administrative Organizations. 4th ed. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Snellen, I. 1998. “Street Level Bureaucracy in an Information Age.” In Public Administration in an Information Age. A Handbook, edited by I. Snellen and W. van de Donk, 497–505. Ohmsha: IOS Press.
   Google Scholar
• Snellen, I. 2002. “Electronic Governance: Implications for Citizens, Politicians and Public Servants.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 68 (2): 183–198. doi:10.1177/0020852302682002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sowa, J. E., and S. C. Selden. 2003. “Administrative Discretion and Active Representation: An Expansion of the Theory of Representative Bureaucracy.” Public Administration Review 63 (6): 700–710. doi:10.1111/1540-6210.00333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun, T. Q., and R. Medaglia. 2019. “Mapping the Challenges of Artificial Intelligence in the Public Sector: Evidence from Public Healthcare.” Government Information Quarterly 36 (2): 368–383. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thierer, A., A. O’Sullivan, and R. Russell. 2017. Artificial Intelligence and Public Policy. Arlington, VA: Mercatus Center George Mason University.
   Google Scholar
• Thomann, E. 2015. “Is Output Performance All about the Resources? A Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Street-level Bureaucrats in Switzerland.” Public Administration 93 (1): 177–194. doi:10.1111/padm.12130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomann, E., N. van Engen, and L. Tummers. 2018. “The Necessity of Discretion: A Behavioral Evaluation of Bottom-up Implementation Theory.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 28 (4): 583–601. doi:10.1093/jopart/muy024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tummers, L., and V. Bekkers. 2014. “Policy Implementation, Street-level Bureaucracy, and the Importance of Discretion.” Public Management Review 16 (4): 527–547. doi:10.1080/14719037.2013.841978.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tummers, L. L., V. Bekkers, E. Vink, and M. Musheno. 2015. “Coping during Public Service Delivery: A Conceptualization and Systematic Review of the Literature.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25 (4): 1099–1126. doi:10.1093/jopart/muu056.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vitalis, A., and N. Duhaut. 2004. “NTIC and Administrative Relationship: From the Window Relationship to the Network Relationship.” French Review of Public Administration 110: 315–326.
   Google Scholar
• Weller, J.-M. 2006. “Poularde Farmer Must Be Saved from Remote Sensing: Public Concern over Administrative Work.” Policies and Public Management 24: 109–122.
   Google Scholar
• Wirtz, B. W., J. C. Weyerer, and B. J. Sturm. 2020. “The Dark Sides of Artificial Intelligence: An Integrated AI Governance Framework for Public Administration.” International Journal of Public Administration 43 (9): 818–829. doi:10.1080/01900692.2020.1749851.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, M. M., J. B. Bullock, and J. D. Lecy. 2019. “Artificial Discretion as a Tool of Governance: A Framework for Understanding the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Public Administration.” Perspectives on Public Management and Governance 2 (4): 301–313.
   Google Scholar
• Zuiderwijk, A., Y. C. Chen, and F. Salem. 2021. “Implications of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Public Governance: A Systematic Literature Review and A Research Agenda.” Government Information Quarterly 38: 101580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zuurmond, A. 1998. “From Bureaucracy to Infocracy: Are Democratic Institutions Lagging Behind?” In Public Administration in an Information Age: A Handbook, edited by I. T. M. W. Snellen and B. H. J. van de Donk, 259–270. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.
   Google Scholar