Algorithmic Governance: Experimental Evidence on Citizens' and Public Administrators' Legitimacy Perceptions of Automated Decision‐Making

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article investigates legitimacy perceptions of automated decision‐making (ADM) among public administrators and citizens. Views of public administrators, who exercise discretion over policy implementation, reflect readiness to integrate AI into decision‐making. Governing by AI ought also to be responsive to the view of citizens, whose support democratic governing ultimately rests on. As AI use in governing grows, understanding the elite‐mass opinion congruence is crucial, and incongruence suggest misalignment between citizen preferences and policy implementation. Using randomized survey experiments conducted among Finnish toplevel public administrators ( N = 842) and a representative sample of citizens ( N = 3245), we compare the legitimacy effects of algorithmic transparency and human discretion over decision‐making in the context of child protection services. Transparency and human discretion enhance perceived legitimacy, with larger treatment effects among administrators. The study concludes that ADM legitimacy theories extend to a Nordic welfare context.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 22 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.