Diametrically Opposed Attributes? Review Process Preferences and Priorities When Contesting Algorithmic Decisions

Abstract

High-stakes algorithmic decisions should be contestable, yet there is limited guidance on how to design for contestability, resulting in inadequate contestation processes. Using an algorithmic university admissions decision scenario, we investigate what type of review process people prefer when contesting algorithmic decisions. Through a choice-based conjoint experiment, we explore review process preferences, asking participants to choose their preferred review process from a choice of two that differ across five design attributes: who the reviewer is, how independent the review is, the ability to communicate with the reviewer, the style of the review, and how much the review costs. Expandin..