The displacement of reality tests. The selection of individuals in the age of machine learning

References

• Abbott, Andrew. 1988. Transcending general linear reality. Sociological Theory 6, no. 2: 169–86.
   Google Scholar
• Allouch, Annabelle. 2017. La société du concours. L’empire des classements scolaires. Paris: Seuil/République des idées.
   Google Scholar
• Amoore, Louise, and Cloud Ethics. 2020. Algorithms and the attribute of ourselves and others. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Angeletti, Thomas. 2011. Faire la réalité ou s'y faire? La modélisation et les déplacements de la politique économique au tournant des années 1970. Politix 24, no. 3: 47–72.
   Google Scholar
• Baudelot, Christian, Yvanie Caillé, Olivier Godechot, and Sylvie Mercier. 2016. Maladies rénales et inégalités sociales d’accès à la greffe en France. Population 71: 23–51.
   Google Scholar
• Berns, Thomas. 2015. Gouverner sans gouverner: une archéologie politique de la statistique. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
   Google Scholar
• Boltanski, Luc. 2008. Rendre la réalité inacceptable. À propos de La production de l’idéologie dominante. Paris: Demopolis.
   Google Scholar
• Boltanski, Luc. 2009. De la critique. Précis de sociologie de l’émancipation. Paris: Gallimard. [On critique. A sociology of emancipation, Cambridge, Polity, 2011].
   Google Scholar
• Boltanski, Luc. 2012. Enigmes et complots. Une enquête à propos d’enquêtes. Paris: Gallimard. [Mysteries and conspiracies: Detective stories, spy novels and the making of modern societies, John Wiley & Sons, 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Boltanski, Luc. 2014. Quelle statistique pour quelle critique. In Statactivisme. Comment lutter avec des nombres, 33–50. Paris: La Découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Boltanski, L., and E. Chiapello. 1999. Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme (Vol. 10). Paris: Gallimard.
   Google Scholar
• Boltanski, Luc, and Laurent Thévenot. 1983. Finding one’s way in social space: A study based on games. Social Science Information 22, no. 4-5: 631–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boltanski, Luc, and Laurent Thévenot. 1991. De la justification: les économies de la grandeur. Paris: Gallimard. [On justification. Economies of worth. Princeton University Press, 2006].
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, Pierre. 1981. Épreuve scolaire et consécration sociale. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales 39: 3–70.
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, Pierre, and Jean-Claude Passeron. 1964. Les héritiers: les étudiants et la culture, 183. Paris: Les Editions de minuit. Collection Grands documents, numéro 18.
   Google Scholar
• Bowker, Geoffrey C., and Susan Star. 1999. Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brayne, Sarah, and Angèle Christin. 2021. Technologies of crime prediction: The reception of algorithms in policing and criminal courts. Social Problems 68, no. 3: 608–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman, Leo. 2001. Statistical modeling: The two cultures. Statistical Science 16, no. 3: 199–309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruno, Isabelle, and Emmanuel Didier. 2013. Benchmarking. L’État sous pression statistique. Paris: Zones.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno, Isabelle, Emmanuel Didier, and Julien Prévieux, eds. 2015. Statactivisme: Comment lutter avec des nombres. Paris: Zones.
   Google Scholar
• Burrell, Jenna. 2016. How the machine ‘thinks’: Understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data & Society 3, no. 1: 2053951715622512.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardon, Dominique. 2015. À quoi rêvent les algorithmes. Nos vies à l’heure des big data. Paris: Seuil/République des idées.
   Google Scholar
• Cardon, Dominique. 2019. Society2Vec: From categorical prediction to behavioral traces. SASE Conference, New York, June 27–29.
   Google Scholar
• Cardon, Dominique, Jean-Philippe Cointet, and Antoine Mazières. 2018. Neurons spike back. The invention of inductives machines and the artificial intelligence controversy. Réseaux 5: 173–220.
   Google Scholar
• Cevolini, Alberto, and Elena Esposito. 2020. From pool to profile: Social consequences of algorithmic prediction in insurance. Big Data & Society 7, no. 2: 2053951720939228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheney-Lippold, John. 2011. A new algorithmic identity soft biopolitics and the modulation of control. Theory, Culture & Society 28: 164–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheney-Lippold, John. 2017. We are data. Algorithms and the making of our digital selves. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cournuéjols, Antoine, Laurent Miclet, and Vincent Barra. 2018. Apprentissage artificiel. Deep learning, concepts et algorithmes. Paris: Eyrolles.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, Kate. 2021. The atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, Kate, and Ryan Calo. 2016. There is a blind spot in AI research. Nature, October 13.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, Gilles. 1992. Postscript on the societies of control, 1990. Cultural Theory: An Anthology, 139–42.
   Google Scholar
• Desrosières, Alain. 2000. La politique des grands nombres: histoire de la raison statistique. Paris: La découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Desrosières, Alain. 2001. Between metrological realism and conventions of equivalence: The ambiguities of quantitative sociology. Genèses 43, no. 2: 112–27.
   Google Scholar
• Desrosières, A. 2010. A politics of knowledge-tools: The case of statistics. In Between enlightenment and disaster: Dimensions of the political use of knowledge, 111–29. Brussels: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Desrosières, Alain. 2014. Prouver et gouverner. Une analyse politique des statistiques publiques. Paris: La découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Desrosières, Alain, and Laurent Thévenot. 1988. Les catégories socioprofessionnelles. Paris: La découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Didier, Emmanuel. 2020. America by the numbers: Quantification, democracy, and the birth of national statistics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duru-Bellat, Marie. 2012. Le mérite contre la justice. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.
   Google Scholar
• Espeland, Wendy, and Michael Sauder. 2016. Engines of anxiety. Academic rankings, reputation and accountability. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Esposito, Elena, and David Stark. 2019. What’s observed in a rating? Rankings as orientation in the face of uncertainty. Theory, Culture & Society 36, no. 4: 3–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eubanks, Virginia. 2017. Automating inequality, how high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fourcade, Marion. 2016. Ordinalization: Lewis A. Coser memorial award for theoretical agenda setting. Sociological Theory 34, no. 3: 175–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fourcade, Marion, and Fleur Johns. 2020. Loops, ladders and links: The recursivity of social and machine learning. Theory and Society 49, no. 5: 803–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, Gerd, Zeno Swijtnik, Theodore Porter, Lorraine Daston, John Beatty, and Lorenz Krüger. 1989. The empire of chance. How probability changed science and everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodfellow, Ian, Yoshua Bengio, and Aaron Courville. 2016. Deep learning. Vol. 1, no. 2. Cambridge: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Hacking, Ian. 1990. The taming of chance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hacking, Ian. 1994. Styles of scientific thinking or reasoning: A new analytical tool for historians and philosophers of the sciences. Trends in the Historiography of Science 151, 31–48.
   Google Scholar
• Haggerty, Kevin D., and Richard V. Ericson. 2017. The surveillant assemblage. In Surveillance, crime and social control, 61–78.
   Google Scholar
• Harcourt, Bernard. 2006. Against prediction: Profiling, policing and punishing in an actuarial Age. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harcourt, Bernard. 2015. Exposed. Desire and disobedience in the digital age. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hénin, Clément. 2021. Confier une décision vitale à une machine. Réseaux 1, no. 225: 187–213.
   Google Scholar
• Hibou, Béatrice. 2012. La bureaucratisation du monde à l’ère néolibérale. Paris: La découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Hofmann, H.J. 1990. Die Anwendung des CART-Verfahrens zur statistischen Bonitätsanalyse von Konsumentenkrediten. Zeitschrift fur Betriebswirtschaft 60: 941–62.
   Google Scholar
• Jobin, Anna, Marcello Ienca, and Effy Vayena. 2019. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence 1, no. 9: 389–99.
   Google Scholar
• John-Mathews, Jean-Marie. 2021. Critical empirical study on black-box explanations in AI.
   Google Scholar
• John-Mathews, Jean-Marie. 2022. Some critical and ethical perspectives on the empirical turn of AI interpretability. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 174: 121209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John-Mathews, Jean-Marie, Dominique Cardon, and Christine Balagué. 2022. From reality to world. A critical perspective on AI fairness. Journal of Business Ethics 178, no. 4: 945–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John-Mathews, Jean-Marie, Robin De Mourat, Donato Ricci, and Maxime Crépel. 2023. Re-enacting machine learning practices to enquire into the moral issues they pose. Convergence, p.13548565231174584.
   Google Scholar
• Kleinberg, Jon, Jens Ludwig, Sendhil Mullainathan, and Cass R. Sunstein. 2018. Discrimination in the age of algorithms. Journal of Legal Analysis 10: 113–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koopman, Colin. 2019. How We became our data. A genealogy of the informational person. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, Bruno. 1999. Pandora’s hope. Essays on the reality of social sciences. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Le Bras, Hervé. 2000. Naissance de la mortalité. L'origine politique de la statistique et de la démographie. Média Diffusion.
   Google Scholar
• Le Galès, Patrick. 2016. Performance measurement as a policy instrument. Policy Studies 37, no. 6: 508–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyon, David. 2001. Surveillance society: Monitoring everyday life. Berkshire: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lu, T., Y. Zhang, and B. Li. 2019. The value of alternative data in credit risk prediction: Evidence from a large field experiment. ICIS 2019 Conference, Munich, December.
   Google Scholar
• Lury, Celia, and Sophie Day. 2019. Algorithmic personalization as a mode of individuation. Theory, Culture & Society 36, no. 2: 17–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackenzie, Adrian. 2017. Machine learners. Archaeology of a data practice. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marres, Noortje, and David Stark. 2020. Put to the test: For a new sociology of testing. The British Journal of Sociology 71, no. 3: 423–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martuccelli, Danilo. 2010. La société singulariste. Paris: Armand Colin.
   Google Scholar
• Mau, Stefen. 2019. The metric society. On the quantification of the social. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• McGrayne, Sharon Bertsch. 2011. The theory that would not die. How Bayes’ rule cracked the enigma code, hunted down Russian submarines & emerged triumphant from two centuries of controversy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, Tom. 1997. Machine learning. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, Michele. 2017. The economization of life. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Noble, Safiya Umoja. 2018. Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Olah, Chris, Alexander Mordvintsev, and Ludwig Schubert. 2017. Feature visualization. Distill 2, no. 11: e7.
   Google Scholar
• O'Neil, Cathy. 2017. Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown.
   Google Scholar
• Pasquale, Franck. 2015. The black box society. The secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pentland, Alex. 2014. Social physics. How good ideas spread. The lessons from a new science. New York: The Penguin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pierru, Emmanuel, and Alexis Spire. 2008. Le crépuscule des catégories socioprofessionnelles. Revue française de science politique 58, no. 3: 457–81.
   Google Scholar
• Poon, Martha. 2007. Scorecards as devices for consumer credit: The case of Fair, Isaac & Company incorporated. The Sociological Review 55, no. 2_suppl: 284–306.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, Theodore M. 1986. The rise of statistical thinking 1820-1900. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, Theodore M. 1995. Trust in numbers. The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Power, Michael. 1997. The audit society. Rituals of verification. London: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, Richard. 2009. Post-demographic machines. Walled Garden 38, no. 2009: 29–39.
   Google Scholar
• Rouvroy, Antoinette, and Thomas Berns. 2013. Gouvernementalité algorithmique et perspectives d’émancipation. Réseaux 177, no. 1: 163–96. [Rouvroy, Antoinette, Thomas Berns. 2013. Algorithmic governmentality and prospects of emancipation. Disparateness as a precondition for individuation through relationships? Réseaux 177: 163–96].
   Google Scholar
• Salganik, Matthew J., I. Lundberg, Alexander T. Kindel, Caitlin E. Ahearn, Khaled Al-Ghoneim, Abdullah Almaatouq, Drew M. Altschul, et al. 2020. Measuring the predictability of life outcomes with a scientific mass collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, no. 15: 8398–403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, James C. 2008. Seeing like a state. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Solove, Daniel. 2004. The digital person: Technology and privacy in the information age. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stark, David, ed. 2020. The performance Complex. Valuations and competitions in social life. London: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Supiot, Alain. 2018. La gouvernance par les nombres. Paris: Fayard.
   Google Scholar
• Susen, S. 2014. Is there such a thing as a ‘pragmatic sociology of critique’? Reflections on Luc Boltanski’s ‘on critique’. In The spirit of Luc Boltanski: Essays on the 'pragmatic sociology of critique', trans. Simon Susen, eds. S. Susen, and B.S. Turner, 173–210. London, UK: Anthem Press.
   Google Scholar
• Terranova, Tiziana. 2004. Network culture: Politics for the information Age. London: Pluto.
   Google Scholar
• Tetlock, Philip. 2005. Expert political judgement: How good is it? How can we know? Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, Peter. 2002. A sociology of modernity: Liberty and discipline. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Zuboff, Shoshana. 2019. The age of surveillance capitalism. The future for a human future and the new frontier of power. New York: Public Affairs.
   Google Scholar