How Do Algorithmic Decision‐Making Systems Used in Public Benefits Determinations Fail? Insights From Legal Challenges

ABSTRACT When algorithmic decision‐making systems fail to function as intended, they become conduits for administrative error and risk producing arbitrary determinations through the very technologies meant to prevent them. Analysis of 71 federal and state court dockets contesting algorithm‐based determinations in disability, unemployment, and nutrition assistance programs shows how this risk manifests in practice. Findings show that deviations from legally prescribed outcomes occur when the translation of statutory requirements into computational logic is compromised by flawed data, problematic design choices, or inherent system limitations. These algorithmic administrative errors are neither isolated glitches nor purely technical problems; they constitute a systemic governance problem that cuts across legal, organizational, and technical domains. Addressing them requires coordinated oversight across all three areas, rather than reliance on post hoc troubleshooting.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Administration Review
Published
2025-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70043
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.37
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How Do Algorithmic Decision‐Making Systems Used in Public Benefits Determinations Fail? Insights From Legal Challenges

Esra Gules‐Guctas
1 citations
Public Administration Review
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
article

How Do Algorithmic Decision‐Making Systems Used in Public Benefits Determinations Fail? Insights From Legal Challenges

Esra Gules‐Guctas
article en
1 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT When algorithmic decision‐making systems fail to function as intended, they become conduits for administrative error and risk producing arbitrary determinations through the very technologies meant to prevent them. Analysis of 71 federal and state court dockets contesting algorithm‐based determinations in disability, unemployment, and nutrition assistance programs shows how this risk manifests in practice. Findings show that deviations from legally prescribed outcomes occur when the translation of statutory requirements into computational logic is compromised by flawed data, problematic design choices, or inherent system limitations. These algorithmic administrative errors are neither isolated glitches nor purely technical problems; they constitute a systemic governance problem that cuts across legal, organizational, and technical domains. Addressing them requires coordinated oversight across all three areas, rather than reliance on post hoc troubleshooting.

Public Administration ReviewVol. 86(2)
The Ohio State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.