Assessing public value failure in government adoption of artificial intelligence

Daniel S. Schiff; Kaylyn Jackson Schiff; Patrick Pierson

doi:10.1111/padm.12742

journal article May 05, 2021

Assessing public value failure in government adoption of artificial intelligence

Daniel S. Schiff

Kaylyn Jackson Schiff

Patrick Pierson

Public Administration Vol. 100 No. 3 pp. 653-673 · Wiley

View at Publisher Save 10.1111/padm.12742

Abstract

AbstractIn the context of rising delegation of administrative discretion to advanced technologies, this study aims to quantitatively assess key public values that may be at risk when governments employ automated decision systems (ADS). Drawing on the public value failure framework coupled with experimental methodology, we address the need to measure and compare the salience of three such values—fairness, transparency, and human responsiveness. Based on a preregistered design, we administer a survey experiment to 1460 American adults inspired by prominent ADS applications in child welfare and criminal justice. The results provide clear causal evidence that certain public value failures associated with artificial intelligence have significant negative impacts on citizens' evaluations of government. We find substantial negative citizen reactions when fairness and transparency are not realized in the implementation of ADS. These results transcend both policy context and political ideology and persist even when respondents are not themselves personally impacted.

Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References

74

[1]

Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Amina Adadi, Mohammed Berrada

IEEE Access 10.1109/access.2018.2870052

[2]

AI Now Institute. (2019)Automated decision systems: examples of government use cases. Available at:https://ainowinstitute.org/nycadschart.pdf

[3]

10.1080/01900690902732731

[4]

10.1080/01900692.2010.517724

[5]

Anderson E. (1995)

[6]

10.1111/padm.12534

[7]

In AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence

Theo Araujo, Natali Helberger, Sanne Kruikemeier et al.

AI & SOCIETY 10.1007/s00146-019-00931-w

[8]

10.1177/02750749922064463

[9]

10.1080/01972240701572913

[10]

10.1145/3351095.3372864

[11]

10.1108/ijpsm-07-2015-0129

[12]

From Street‐Level to System‐Level Bureaucracies: How Information and Communication Technology is Transforming Administrative Discretion and Constitutional Control

Mark Bovens, Stavros Zouridis

Public Administration Review 10.1111/0033-3352.00168

[13]

10.1111/0033-3352.00165

[14]

10.1504/ijpp.2009.025077

[15]

10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7

[16]

10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00609.x

[17]

10.1111/puar.12238

[18]

10.1080/14719037.2013.771699

[19]

Artificial Intelligence, Discretion, and Bureaucracy

Justin B. Bullock

The American Review of Public Administration 10.1177/0275074019856123

[20]

Buolamwini J. (2018)

[21]

10.3233/ip-170050

[22]

10.2307/2110826

[23]

Can we open the black box of AI?

Davide Castelvecchi

Nature 10.1038/538020a

[24]

Fair Prediction with Disparate Impact: A Study of Bias in Recidivism Prediction Instruments

Alexandra Chouldechova

Big Data 10.1089/big.2016.0047

[25]

Chouldechova A. (2018)

[26]

10.1177/2053168015622072

[27]

10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000066

[28]

A public value perspective for ICT enabled public sector reforms: A theoretical reflection

Antonio Cordella, Carla M. Bonina

Government Information Quarterly 10.1016/j.giq.2012.03.004

[29]

DeclareDesign. (2018)The trouble with “controlling for blocks”. DeclareDesign 9 October. Available at:https://declaredesign.org/blog/biased-fixed-effects.html

[30]

10.1287/isre.3.1.60

[31]

The New Public Service: Serving Rather than Steering

Robert B. Denhardt, Janet Vinzant Denhardt

Public Administration Review 10.1111/0033-3352.00117

[32]

Diakopoulos N. Trielli D.&Baek S.(2020)Algorithm tips—resources and leads for investigating algorithms in society. Available at:http://algorithmtips.org/

[33]

New Public Management Is Dead--Long Live Digital-Era Governance

P. Dunleavy

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theo... 10.1093/jopart/mui057

[34]

Eubanks V. (2017)

[35]

European Commission (2019)

[36]

10.1007/s11192-010-0237-1

[37]

10.1177/0275074018814244

[38]

10.2307/3234884

[39]

Government of Canada. (2021)Algorithmic impact assessment tool. Available at:https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/digital-government/digital-government-innovations/responsible-use-ai/algorithmic-impact-assessment.html

[40]

10.1016/s1096-7494(01)00041-1

[41]

Gulick L. "The metaphors of public administration" Public Administration Quarterly (1984)

[42]

Towards an empirical research agenda for public value theory

Jean Hartley, John Alford, Eva Knies et al.

Public Management Review 10.1080/14719037.2016.1192166

[43]

Hidalgo N.(2020)Re: Oversight hearing of Local Law 49 of 2018 (Open Algorithms Law) & Int 1806–2019 (aka ADS transparency) & Int 1447–2019 (aka data inventory). Available at:https://beta.nyc/2020/01/22/re-oversight-hearing-of-local-law-49-of-2018-open-algorithms-law-int-1806-2019-aka-ads-transparency-int-1447-2019-aka-data-inventory/

[44]

10.1007/s11948-017-9975-2

[45]

10.1177/0095399707300703

[46]

10.1016/j.giq.2011.04.005

[47]

Kearns I. (2004)

[48]

Kelly G. (2002)

[49]

Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment

Jennifer M. Logg, Julia A. Minson, Don A. Moore

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process... 10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.12.005

[50]

10.1145/3351095.3372867

Showing 50 of 74 references

Cited By

108

A Replication of “Explaining Why the Computer Says No: Algorithmic Transparency Affects the Perceived Trustworthiness of Automated Decision‐Making”

Xuemei Fang, Huayu Zhou · 2025

Public Administration

AI: Friend or foe of fairness perceptions of the tax administration? A survey experiment on citizens' procedural fairness perceptions

Anouk Decuypere, Anne Van de Vijver · 2025

Government Information Quarterly

The decision-making by citizens: Evaluating the effects of rule-driven and learning-driven automated responders on citizen-initiated contact

Shangrui Wang, Chen Min · 2024

Computers in Human Behavior

‘Just like I thought’: Street‐level bureaucrats trust AI recommendations if they confirm their professional judgment

Friso Selten, Marcel Robeer · 2023

Public Administration Review

Metrics

108

Citations

74

References

Details

Published: May 05, 2021
Vol/Issue: 100(3)
Pages: 653-673
License: View

Authors

D

Daniel S. Schiff

School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta Georgia USA

K

Kaylyn Jackson Schiff

Department of Political Science Emory University Atlanta Georgia USA

P

Patrick Pierson

Department of Political Science Emory University Atlanta Georgia USA

Cite This Article

Daniel S. Schiff, Kaylyn Jackson Schiff, Patrick Pierson (2021). Assessing public value failure in government adoption of artificial intelligence. Public Administration, 100(3), 653-673. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12742

Assessing public value failure in government adoption of artificial intelligence

You May Also Like