Identifying Algorithmic Decision Subjects' Needs for Meaningful Contestability

Contestability has been proposed as a key element in designing algorithmic decision-making processes that safeguard decision subjects' rights to dignity and autonomy. However, little is known about how contestability can be operationalized based on decision subjects' needs and preferences. We address this research gap by identifying decision subjects' information and procedural needs for enacting meaningful contestability. To this end, we chose an illegal holiday rental detection scenario as our case; a high-risk decision-making process in the public sector. We conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with citizens with experience renting their homes out and different levels of AI literacy. We found that decision subjects request interventions that facilitate (1) cooperation in sense-making, (2) support in contestation acts, and (3) appropriate responsibility attribution. Our results highlight the cooperative work behind contestability, and motivate future efforts to structure individual and collective action, to personalize explanations for contestability, and to open up sites of contestation in AI pipelines.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Published
2025-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3757415
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.73
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Identifying Algorithmic Decision Subjects' Needs for Meaningful Contestability

Himanshu Verma, Alessandro Bozzon, Ujwal Gadiraju, Kars Alfrink et al.
2 citations
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
4.73
article

Identifying Algorithmic Decision Subjects' Needs for Meaningful Contestability

Himanshu Verma, Alessandro Bozzon, Ujwal Gadiraju, Kars Alfrink, Agathe Balayn, Mireia Yurrita
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Contestability has been proposed as a key element in designing algorithmic decision-making processes that safeguard decision subjects' rights to dignity and autonomy. However, little is known about how contestability can be operationalized based on decision subjects' needs and preferences. We address this research gap by identifying decision subjects' information and procedural needs for enacting meaningful contestability. To this end, we chose an illegal holiday rental detection scenario as our case; a high-risk decision-making process in the public sector. We conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with citizens with experience renting their homes out and different levels of AI literacy. We found that decision subjects request interventions that facilitate (1) cooperation in sense-making, (2) support in contestation acts, and (3) appropriate responsibility attribution. Our results highlight the cooperative work behind contestability, and motivate future efforts to structure individual and collective action, to personalize explanations for contestability, and to open up sites of contestation in AI pipelines.

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionVol. 9(7)
Delft University of Technology (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
4.73
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.