Algorithmic Control: A Legitimacy Perspective on Worker-level Implications (AlgoWork)

我们初步研究项目的主要成果是（1）概念框架（2）对传统组织中算法控制的使用及其对员工影响的实证研究;以及（3）揭示平台工作者如何判断合法性的法则网络（例如，在自主性，公平性，隐私，技术压力方面）以及这些评估如何反过来影响他们的认知反应（例如，继续其平台工作的意图）。我们的项目工作和迄今为止的结果表明，需要进一步的研究来全面了解空调系统对工人的影响（相对于个别AC形式的影响），以及获得工人的行为阻力反应（所谓的“algoactivistic”的做法），以这种系统（相对于他们的主要认知反应不同的AC形式）更深入的了解。这引发了三个研究问题（RQ），它们代表了后续项目的重点：（1）空调系统的关键概念维度（及相关特征）是什么，以及在平台中可以找到这些维度/特征的哪些典型组合基于平台和/或传统组织？(2)传统组织中使用的哪些AC系统配置被工作人员判断为合法（不合法），为什么？(3)平台工作人员使用什么算法活动主义实践来“推回”AC系统，从过程的角度来看，这些实践是如何相互连接的？为了解决RQ 1，我们打算开发一个分类的AC系统，并在此基础上，经验得出这样的系统的原型。为了解决RQ 2，我们将首先提取AC系统的维度和特征，这些维度和特征对于传统工人的合法性判断至关重要，然后识别被工人判断为（不）合法的AC系统配置。为了解决RQ 3，将在平台环境中开发一个算法能动性实践的动态过程模型，建立在对这些实践的分类基础上。总体项目结果将为空调系统的道德设计和使用提供可操作的见解和建议，并支持相应的监管工作。此外，该项目旨在为更广泛的社会讨论提供新的见解，这些讨论涉及AC系统的使用及其对未来工作的影响。

The main outcomes of our initial research project are (1) a conceptual framework (5RSM framework) that distinguishes seven forms of algorithmic control (AC) and a corresponding scale for measuring perceived AC; (2) empirical insights into the use of AC and its effects on workers in the context of traditional organizations; as well as (3) a nomological network that sheds light on how platform workers judge the legitimacy (e.g., in terms of autonomy, fairness, privacy, technostress) of different AC forms and how these assessments in turn affect their cognitive reactions (e.g., the intention to continue their platform work). Our project work and results to date have indicated that further research is needed to develop a holistic understanding regarding the worker-level implications of AC systems (as opposed to the implications of individual AC forms), as well as to gain a deeper understanding of workers’ behavioral resistance reactions (so-called “algoactivistic” practices) to such systems (as opposed to their predominantly cognitive reactions to distinct AC forms). This gives rise to three research questions (RQs), which represent the focus of the follow-up project: (1) What are key conceptual dimensions (and related characteristics) of AC systems and what archetypical combinations of these dimensions/characteristics can be found in platform-based and/or traditional organizations? (2) What AC system configurations used in traditional organizations are judged as (not) legitimate by workers, and why? (3) What algoactivistic practices do platform workers use to ‘push back’ against AC systems, and how are these practices connected to one another from a process perspective? To address RQ1, we intend to develop a taxonomy of AC systems and, based on this, empirically derive archetypes of such systems. To address RQ2, we will first extract the dimensions and characteristics of AC systems that are critical for legitimacy judgments by traditional workers, and then identify AC system configurations that are judged as (not) legitimate by workers. To address RQ3, a dynamic process model of algoactivistic practices in the platform context will be developed, building on a categorization of such practices. The overarching project results will provide actionable insights and recommendations for the ethically responsible design and use of AC systems and support corresponding regulatory efforts. In addition, the project aims to contribute new insights to the broader societal discussion regarding the use of AC systems and their implications for the future of work.