research-article

Conceptualising Contestability: Perspectives on Contesting Algorithmic Decisions

Authors:

Henrietta Lyons,

Eduardo Velloso,

Tim MillerAuthors Info & Claims

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 5, Issue CSCW1

Article No.: 106, Pages 1 - 25

https://doi.org/10.1145/3449180

Published: 22 April 2021 Publication History

Abstract

As the use of algorithmic systems in high-stakes decision-making increases, the ability to contest algorithmic decisions is being recognised as an important safeguard for individuals. Yet, there is little guidance on what 'contestability'--the ability to contest decisions--in relation to algorithmic decision-making requires. Recent research presents different conceptualisations of contestability in algorithmic decision-making. We contribute to this growing body of work by describing and analysing the perspectives of people and organisations who made submissions in response to Australia's proposed 'AI Ethics Framework', the first framework of its kind to include 'contestability' as a core ethical principle. Our findings reveal that while the nature of contestability is disputed, it is seen as a way to protect individuals, and it resembles contestability in relation to human decision-making. We reflect on and discuss the implications of these findings.

References

[1]

Alkhatib, A. and M. Bernstein. 2019. Street--Level Algorithms: A Theory at the Gaps Between Policy and Decision. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1--13.

[2]

Andersen, K. B. 2018. Regeringen vil erklære 20.700 danskere på kontanthjælp klar til arbejde. from https://nyheder.tv2.dk/politik/2018-05--29-regeringen-vil-erklaere-20700-danskere-paa-kontanthjaelp-klar-til-arbejde

[3]

Bannister, F. and R. Connolly. 2014. ICT, public values and transformative government: A framework and programme for research. Government Information Quarterly, 31(1), 119--128.

[4]

Bannon, L. 2011. Reimagining HCI: Toward a More Human-Centered Perspective. Interactions, 50--57.

[5]

Barocas, S. and A. D. Selbst. 2016. Big Data's Disparate Impact. California Law Review, Inc., 671--732.

[6]

Beich, A. 2019. Jobcentre gør mennesker syge -- politikerne må handle nu. from https://jyllands-posten.dk/debat/kronik/ECE11390084/jobcentre-goer-mennesker-syge-politikerne-maa-handle-nu/

[7]

Benjamin, R. 2019. Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. Polity Press.

[8]

Berg, M. 1998. The Politics of Technology: On Bringing Social Theory into Technological Design. Science, Technology & Human Values, 23, 456--490.

[9]

Bergstrom, C. T. and J. D. West. 2020. Calling Bullshit: The Art of Scepticism in a Data-Driven World: Random House

[10]

Beskæftigelsesministeriet. 2016. Bekendtgørelse af lov om en aktiv beskæftigelsesindsats. from https://www.retsinformation.dk/forms/r0710.aspx?id=184891

[11]

Black, J. 2001. Managing Discretion. ARLC Conference Papers on Penalties: Policy, Principles and Practice in Government Regulation

[12]

Blomberg, J. and H. Karasti. 2013. Reflections on 25 years of ethnography in CSCW. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 22(4--6), 373--423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-012-9183-1

Digital Library

[13]

Boulus-Rødje, N. 2018. In Search for the Perfect Pathway: Supporting Knowledge Work of Welfare Workers. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 27, 841--874. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-018-9318-0

Digital Library

[14]

Bourdieu, P. 1999. Site Effects. In P. Bourdieu, A. Accardo, G. Balazs, S. Beaud and F. Bonvin (Eds.), The Weight of the World (Vol. 2, pp. 123--180). Polity Press.

[15]

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.

[16]

Bowers, J., G. Button, and W. Sharrock. 1995. Workflow From Within and Without: Technology and Cooperative Work on the Print Industry Shopfloor. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 51--66.

[17]

Bowker, G. C. 2005. Memory Practices in the Sciences. MIT Press.

[18]

Bowker, G. C. and S. L. Star. 1999. Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. MIT Press.

[19]

Bowker, G. C., S. L. Star, W. Turner, and L. Gasser. 2014. Social Science, Technical Systems, And Cooperative Work: Beyond the Great Divide (2 ed.). Psychology Press.

[20]

boyd, d.and K. Crawford. 2012. CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR BIG DATA. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662--679.

[21]

Brown, A., A. Chouldechova, E. Putnam-Hornstein, A. Tobin, and R. Vaithianathan. 2019. 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, 1--12.

[22]

Bucher, T. 2018. If?then: Algorithmic Power and Politics (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.

[23]

Campolo, A.and K. Crawford. 2020. Enchanted Determinism: Power without Responsibility in Artificial Intelligence. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, 6, 1--19.

[24]

Chiusi, F., S. Fischer, N. Kayser-Bril, and M. Spielkamp. 2020. Automating Society Report 2020. AlgorithmWatch.

[25]

Crabtree, A., D. M. Nichols, J. O'Brien, M. Rouncefield, and M. B. Twidale. 2000. Ethnomethodologically Informed Ethnography and Information System Design. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(7), 666- 682.

[26]

Danish Agency for Labour Market and Recruitment. 2018. Active labour market policy measures. from https://www.star.dk/en/active-labour-market-policy-measures/

[27]

Dolata, M., B. Schenk, J. Fuhrer, A. Marti, and G. Schwabe. 2020. When the System does not Fit: Coping Strategies of Employment Consultants. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 1--40.

[28]

Douglas, J. D. 1967. Social Meanings of Suicide (Vol. 1). Princeton University Press.

[29]

Douglas, M. 1966. Purity and Danger: An analysis of the concepts of pollution and taboo (Vol. 1). Routledge

[30]

Douglas, M. 1986. How Institutions Think (1 ed.). Syracuse University Press.

[31]

Durkheim, É. and M. Mauss. 1903. De Quelques Formes Primitives de Classification. Contribution à l'étude des Représentations Collectives. L'Année Sociologique, 6, 1--72.

[32]

Elish, M. C. 2018. The Stakes of Uncertainty: Developing and Integrating Machine Learning in Clinical Care. In Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings, 364--380.

[33]

Eubanks, V. 2017. Automating Inequality: How High-tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. St. Martin's Press.

[34]

Fitzgerald, R. and W. Housley. 2015. Advances in Membership Categorisation Analysis. Sage Publications Ltd.

[35]

Flügge, A. A., T. Hildebrandt, and N. H. Møller. 2021. Street-Level Algorithms and AI in Bureaucratic Decision-Making: A Caseworker Perspective. in Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1), Article 40, 22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449114

Digital Library

[36]

Flyverbom, M. 2019. The Digital Prism: Transparancy and Manageed Visibilities in a Datafied World. Cambridge University Press.

[37]

Friedman, B., P. H. Kahn, and A. Borning. 2008. Value sensitive design and information systems. The handbook of information and computer ethics, 69--101.

[38]

Garfinkel, H. 1967. Good organizational reasons for ?bad' clinic records. In H. Garfinkel (Ed.), Studies on Ethnomethodology (pp. 186--207). Prentice-Hall, Inc.

[39]

Garfinkel, H. 1967. Studies in Etnomethodology (Vol. 1). Blackwell Publishers Inc.

[40]

Garsten, C. and K. Jacobsson. 2013. Sorting people in and out: The plasticity of the categories of employability, work capacity and disability as technologies of government. ephemera: theory & politics in organization, 13(4), 825--850.

[41]

Gillespie, T. 2014. The Relevance of Algorithms. Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society, 1--32.

[42]

Hacking, I. 1985. Making Up People. In T. L. Heller, M. Sosna andD. E. Wellbery (Eds.), Reconstructing Individualism. Stanford University Press.

[43]

Hammersley, M. and P. Atkinson. 2007. Ethnography: Principles in practice (Vol. 3). Taylor & Francis: Routledge.

[44]

Harper, R. 2019. The Role of HCI in the Age of AI. International Journal of Human--Computer Interaction, 35(15), 1331--1344.

[45]

Harper, R., D. Randall, and W. Sharrock. 2016. Choice: The Sciences of Reason in the 21st Century: A Critical Assessment. Polity Press.

[46]

Henriksen, L. R. 2019. Jobcentret gør sygemeldte endnu mere syge. from https://www.fyens.dk/danmark/Jobcentret-goer-sygemeldte-endnu-mere-syge/artikel/3359664

[47]

Høybye-Mortensen, M. and P. Ejbye-Ernst. 2018. The long way to data-driven decision-making: How do casework registrations become management information? STS Encounters, 10(2.2), 5--36.

[48]

Hughes, J. A., D. Randall, and D. Shapiro. 1993. From Ethnographic Record to System Design: Some experiences from the field. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 123--141.

[49]

Keddell, E. 2011. Reasoning Processes in Child Protection Decision Making: Negotiating Moral Minefields and Risky Relationships. The British Journal of Social Work, 41(7), 1251--1270.

[50]

Keyes, O. 2018. The Misgendering Machines: Trans/HCI Implications of Automatic Gender Recognition. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 88(CSCW, Article 88), 1--22.

Digital Library

[51]

Keymolen, E. and D. Broeders. 2011. Innocence Lost: Care and Control in Dutch Digital Youth Care. British Journal of Social Work, 43(1), 41--63.

[52]

Lampland, M. and S. L. Star. 2009. Standards and their stories: how quantifying, classifying, and formalizing practices shape everyday life. Cornell University Press.

[53]

Law, J. and J. Urry. 2013. Enacting the social. Economy and Society, 33(3), 390--410.

[54]

Lipsky, M. 1980. Street-Level Bureaucracy: The Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service. Russell Sage Foundation.

[55]

Loxha, A. and M. Morgandi. 2014. Profiling the Unemployed: A Review of OECD Experiences and Implications for Emerging Economies. Social Protection & Labor, 1424, 1--45.

[56]

Martin, D., J. O'Neill, D. Randall, and M. Rouncefield. 2007. How Can I Help You? Call Centres, Classification Work and Coordination. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 16, 231--264.

Digital Library

[57]

Matthiesen, S. and P. Bjørn. 2017. When Distribution of Tasks and Skills Are Fundamentally Problematic: A Failure Story from Global Software Outsourcing. PACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(CSCW), 74--90.

[58]

Maynard, D. W. 1984. Inside Plea Bargaining: The Language of Negotiation. Plenum Press.

[59]

Maynard-Moody, S. and M. Musheno. 2003. Cops, Teachers, Counselors: Stories from the Front Lines of Public Service (Vol. 1). The University of Michigan Press.

[60]

Ministry of Finance. 2019. National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence: The Danish Government.

[61]

Møller, N. H. and P. Bjørn. 2011. Layers in Sorting Practices: Sorting out Patiens with Potential Cancer. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 20, 123--153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-011-9133-3

Digital Library

[62]

Møller, N. H., I. Shklovski, and T. T. Hildebrandt. 2020. Shifting Concepts of Value: Designing Algorithmic Decision-Support Systems for Public Services. In Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society, 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3419249.3420149

Digital Library

[63]

Paanakker, H. L. 2020. Perceptions of the Frontline Craft: Assessing Value Convergence Between Policy Makers, Managers, and Street-Level Professionals in the Prison Sector. Administration & Society, https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399720933815

[64]

Pasquale, F. 2020. New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI. Harvard University Press.

[65]

Persson, J., A. Reinwald, E. Skorve, and P. Nielsen. 2017. Value positions in e-government strategies: Something is (not) changing in the state of Denmark.

[66]

Petersen, A. C. M., L. R. Christensen, and T. T. Hildebrandt. 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

Digital Library

[67]

QSR International. 2019. NVivo 12. from https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo/nvivo-products/nvivo-12-mac

[68]

Randall, D. 1995. A Comment on Lucy Suchman's ?do Categories Have Politics?". Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 3, 47--50.

Digital Library

[69]

Randall, D., R. Harper, and M. Rouncefield. 2007. Fieldwork for Design: Theory and Practice. Springer.

[70]

Ranerup, A. and H. Z. Henriksen. 2019. Value positions viewed through the lens of automated decision-making: The case of social services. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101377.

[71]

Rawls, A. W. 2010. Social Order as Moral Order. In S. Hitlin andS. Vaisey (Eds.), Handbook of the Sociology of Morality (pp. 95--122). New York: Springer Science+Business Media.

[72]

Rieder, G. 2018. Big Data: Or, the Vision that Would Not Fade. (PhD Dissertation), IT University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

[73]

Rouncefield, M. 2011. Fieldwork, Ethnography and Ethnomethodology LSCITS Socio-Technical Systems Engineering Handbook (pp. 44--48). http://archive.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/STSE-Handbook/: University of St Andrew.

[74]

Sacks, H. 1992. Lectures on Conversation (Vol. I & II). Blackwell Publishing.

[75]

Schmidt, K.and I. Wagner. 2003. Ordering Systems: Coordinative Practices in Architectural Design and Planning. In Proceedings of the 2003 international ACM SIGGROUP conference on Supporting group work, 274--283.

[76]

Schultz. 2018. MØD ASTA -- DIN NYE ASSISTENT: Interview med Simon Kohrtz, produktchef, Schultz. from https://schultz.dk/om-schultz/nyt-fra-schultz/moed-asta-din-nye-assistent/

[77]

Sendak, M., M. C. Elish, M. Gao, J. Futoma, W. Ratliff, M. Nichols, et al. 2020. "The Human Body is a Black Box": Supporting Clinical Decision-Making with Deep Learning. In Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability and transparency, 99--109.

Digital Library

[78]

Skolnick, J. H. 1966. Justice Without Trial: Law Enforcement in Democratic Society. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

[79]

Smith, R. J. and P. Atkinson. 2015. Method and Measurement in Sociology, fifty years on. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(1), 99--110.

[80]

Star, S. L. and G. C. Bowker. 2007. Enacting silence: Residual categories as a challenge for ethics, information systems, and communication. Ethics and Information Technology, 9, 273--280.

Digital Library

[81]

Star, S. L. and A. Strauss. 1999. Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 8(1--2), 9--30.

[82]

Steensland, B. 2010. Moral Classification and Social Policy. In S. Hitlin and S. Vaisey (Eds.), Handbook of the Sociology of Morality (pp. 455--467). Springer.

[83]

Suchman, L. 1993. Do Categories Have Politics? The language/action perspective reconsidered. In Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Milan, Italy. ECSCW'93.

Digital Library

[84]

Suchman, L. 1995. Making Work Visible. Communication of the ACM, 38(9), 56--64.

Digital Library

[85]

Suchman, L. A. 1987. Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge University Press.

Digital Library

[86]

Suchman, L. A. 2007. Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions. Cambridge University Press.

Digital Library

[87]

Timmermans, S. and M. Berg. 1997. Standardization in action: Achieving local universality through medical protocols. Social Studies of Science, 27, 273--305.

[88]

Verne, G. 2015. "The winners are those who have used the old paper form" On citizens and automated public services. (PhD Dissertation), University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. (No. 1650)

[89]

Villesen, K. 2010. Socialrådgivere modarbejder beskæftigelsespolitikken. from https://www.information.dk/indland/2010/01/socialraadgivere-modarbejder-beskaeftigelsespolitikken

[90]

Voida, A., L. Dombrowski, G. R. Hayes, and M. Mazmanian. 2014. Shared values/conflicting logics: working around e-government systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 3583--3592.

Cited By

Nishal SSinchai JDiakopoulos N(2024)Understanding Practices around Computational News Discovery Tools in the Domain of Science JournalismProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36374198:CSCW1(1-36)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637419
Ehsan ULiao QPassi SRiedl MDaumé H(2024)Seamful XAI: Operationalizing Seamful Design in Explainable AIProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373968:CSCW1(1-29)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637396
Atreja SIm JResnick PHemphill L(2024)AppealMod: Inducing Friction to Reduce Moderator Workload of Handling User AppealsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36372968:CSCW1(1-35)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637296
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Conceptualising Contestability: Perspectives on Contesting Algorithmic Decisions
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)

Recommendations

Contestability in Algorithmic Systems
CSCW '19 Companion: Companion Publication of the 2019 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

As algorithmic (and particularly machine learning) decision making systems become both more widespread and make more important decisions, there are growing concerns about their embedded values and ability to establish legitimacy among decision subjects. ...
Disentangling Fairness Perceptions in Algorithmic Decision-Making: the Effects of Explanations, Human Oversight, and Contestability
CHI '23: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Recent research claims that information cues and system attributes of algorithmic decision-making processes affect decision subjects’ fairness perceptions. However, little is still known about how these factors interact. This paper presents a user study ...
What’s the Appeal? Perceptions of Review Processes for Algorithmic Decisions
CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

If you were significantly impacted by an algorithmic decision, how would you want the decision to be reviewed? In this study, we explore perceptions of review processes for algorithmic decisions that differ across three dimensions: the reviewer, how the ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction Volume 5, Issue CSCW1

CSCW

April 2021

5016 pages

EISSN:2573-0142

DOI:10.1145/3460939

Editor:
Jeff Nichols
Apple Inc., United States

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2021 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 22 April 2021

Published in PACMHCI Volume 5, Issue CSCW1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

37
Total Citations
View Citations
887
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)196
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)30

Reflects downloads up to 15 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Nishal SSinchai JDiakopoulos N(2024)Understanding Practices around Computational News Discovery Tools in the Domain of Science JournalismProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36374198:CSCW1(1-36)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637419
Ehsan ULiao QPassi SRiedl MDaumé H(2024)Seamful XAI: Operationalizing Seamful Design in Explainable AIProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373968:CSCW1(1-29)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637396
Atreja SIm JResnick PHemphill L(2024)AppealMod: Inducing Friction to Reduce Moderator Workload of Handling User AppealsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36372968:CSCW1(1-35)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637296
Wang AKapoor SBarocas SNarayanan A(2024)Against Predictive Optimization: On the Legitimacy of Decision-making Algorithms That Optimize Predictive AccuracyACM Journal on Responsible Computing10.1145/36365091:1(1-45)Online publication date: 20-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3636509
Deck LSchoeffer JDe-Arteaga MKühl N(2024)A Critical Survey on Fairness Benefits of Explainable AIProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3630106.3658990(1579-1595)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3630106.3658990
Kou YMa RZhang ZZhou YGui X(2024)Community Begins Where Moderation Ends: Peer Support and Its Implications for Community-Based RehabilitationProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642675(1-18)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642675
Yoo DWoo HNguyen VBirnbaum MKruzan KKim JAbowd GDe Choudhury M(2024)Patient Perspectives on AI-Driven Predictions of Schizophrenia Relapses: Understanding Concerns and Opportunities for Self-Care and TreatmentProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642369(1-20)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642369
Li JCao HLin LHou YZhu REl Ali A(2024)User Experience Design Professionals’ Perceptions of Generative Artificial IntelligenceProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642114(1-18)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642114
Karusala NUpadhyay SVeeraraghavan RGajos K(2024)Understanding Contestability on the Margins: Implications for the Design of Algorithmic Decision-making in Public ServicesProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3641898(1-16)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3641898
Starke CMetikoš LHelberger Nde Vreese C(2024)Contesting personalized recommender systems: a cross-country analysis of user preferencesInformation, Communication & Society10.1080/1369118X.2024.2363926(1-20)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2024.2363926
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents