Algorithmic Harm: A Response to Critics

Clicks: 2
ID: 315927
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract In our 2025 book, Algorithmic Harm, we contend that the use of algorithms can benefit consumers in many ways (largely because of greater personalization), but that it can also cause harm in the face of information deficits and behavioral biases (again, largely because of greater personalization). Unsophisticated consumers, as we call them, are especially vulnerable to algorithmic harm. In this short response to a set of excellent comments on our book, we explore some of the benefits of personalization; some of the costs of forbidding it; some challenges, in terms of feasibility, to our preferred approaches; and the intriguing question whether and in what sense algorithms might be said to have an unconscious.
Reference Key
openalex_W7163573152 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Oren Bar-Gill, Cass R Sunstein
Journal Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jrls/jlag005
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.