Skip to main navigation Skip to main content
info(at)avldigital.remove-this.de
Deutsch English
Last searches

Results for *

Displaying results 1 to 13 of 13.

  1. Algorithms, platforms, and ethnic bias
    an integrative essay
    Author: Silva, Selena; Kenney, Martin
    Published: [2018]
    Publisher:  Berkeley, University of California, Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, [Berkeley, CA]

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Content information
    Volltext (kostenfrei)
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Series: BRIE working paper ; 2018, 3
    Subjects: Digital bias; digital discrimination; algorithms; platform economy; racism
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 46 Seiten), Illustrationen
    Notes:

    In Phylon: The Clark Atlanta University Review of Race and Culture (Summer/Winter 2018) Vol. 55, No. 1 & 2: 9-37
  2. Algorithms, platforms, and ethnic bias
    a diagnostic model
    Author: Silva, Selena; Kenney, Martin
    Published: [2019]
    Publisher:  Berkeley, University of California, Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, [Berkeley, CA]

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Content information
    Volltext (kostenfrei)
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Series: BRIE working paper ; 2019, 4
    Subjects: algorithms; digital bias; digital discrimination; platform economy; racism
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 10 Seiten), Illustrationen
    Notes:

    Forthcoming in Communications of the Association of Computing Machinery November 2019
  3. „Fake News“ in der Online-Kommunikation
    eine Betrachtung des verfassungsrechtlichen Kommunikationsschutzes von „Fake News“ im Zusammenhang mit neuen Kommunikationsmitteln, ihrer Regulierbarkeit, ihrer einfach-gesetzlichen Regulierung de lege lata sowie der gesetzgeberischen Handlungsoptionen de lege ferenda = “Fake News” in online communication
    Author: Nölscher, Patrick
    Published: 2023

    „Fake News“ bilden seit Menschengedenken ein zentrales Problem für die individuelle und öffentliche Meinungsbildung. Dabei wird die Wirkung verbreiteter Desinformation heutzutage durch die technischen Möglichkeiten im Bereich der... more

    Access:

    Location:
    Universitätsbibliothek Braunschweig
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Bremen
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Universitätsbibliothek Clausthal
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Niedersächsische Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Fachhochschule für öffentliche Verwaltung, Polizei und Rechtspflege des Landes Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Bibliothek
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Helmut-Schmidt-Universität, Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg, Universitätsbibliothek
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg Carl von Ossietzky
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Technische Universität Hamburg, Universitätsbibliothek
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Bibliothek der Hochschule Hannover
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan
    Location:
    Bibliothek im Kurt-Schwitters-Forum
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB) / Leibniz-Informationszentrum Technik und Naturwissenschaften und Universitätsbibliothek
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Bundesverfassungsgericht, Bibliothek
    Signature:
    Online-Ressource
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Zentrale Hochschulbibliothek Lübeck
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Leuphana Universität Lüneburg, Medien- und Informationszentrum, Universitätsbibliothek
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Hochschule Magdeburg-Stendal, Hochschulbibliothek
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Hochschule Osnabrück, Bibliothek Campus Westerberg
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Hochschule Magdeburg-Stendal, Standort Stendal, Bibliothek
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    UB Weimar
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

     

    „Fake News“ bilden seit Menschengedenken ein zentrales Problem für die individuelle und öffentliche Meinungsbildung. Dabei wird die Wirkung verbreiteter Desinformation heutzutage durch die technischen Möglichkeiten im Bereich der Online-Kommunikation, etwa durch die Echokammern in sozialen Netzwerken oder den Einsatz künstlicher Meinungsverstärker, mitunter noch verstärkt. Effekte von einmal geäußerter Desinformation lassen sich aus kognitionswissenschaftlicher Perspektive nur noch sehr schwer korrigieren. Die Arbeit beschäftigt sich daher mit dem (kommunikations-)grundrechtlichen Schutz ... For as long as anyone can remember, fake news has been a central problem for the formation of individual and public opinion. Today, the effect of widespread disinformation is amplified by the technical possibilities of online communication, such as echo chambers in social networks or the use of artificial opinion amplifiers. From a cognitive science perspective, it is very difficult to correct the effects of disinformation once it has been expressed. The paper therefore deals with the protection of fake news in online communication under fundamental law on the basis of the case law ...

     
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Content information
    Volltext (kostenfrei)
    Volltext (kostenfrei)
    Source: Union catalogues
    Contributor: Paulus, Andreas (AkademischeR BetreuerIn); Spindler, Gerald (AkademischeR BetreuerIn)
    Language: German
    Media type: Dissertation
    Format: Online
    Other identifier:
    Subjects: Fake News; Social Bots; Soziale Netzwerke; Soziales Netzwerk; Videosharing-Dienst; Videosharing-Dienste; Medienstaatsvertrag; MStV; Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz; NetzDG; Digital Services Act; DSA; Künstliche Intelligenz; KI; Meinungsfreiheit; Medienfreiheiten; Kommunikationsgrundrecht; Kommunikationsgrundrechte; Mitteilungsfreiheit; Pressefreiheit; Rundfunktfreiheit; Internetfreiheit; Postfaktisch; Postfaktisches Zeitalter; Internetkommunikation; Internet; Mit-Mach-Web; Web 2.0; Prosument; Rezipient; Konsument; Lüge; Lügen; unwahre Tatsachen; unwahre Tatsache; Meinung; Behauptung; Algorithmen; Algorithmus; Informationsselektion; Filter; Filterblasen; Uploadfilter; Anonymität; Täuschung; Täuschungen; Echokammern; Echokammer; Gatekeeper; Dienende Freiheit; Kommunikationsmodell; Dienende Meinungsfreiheit; positive Freiheit; negative Freiheit; Positiv-illiberales Freiheitsverständnis; Wahrheitsdoktrin; Beitragsformel; Russia Today; RT; RT Deutsch; RT France; Sputnik; Anwendungserweiterung; Inländische juristische Personen des Privatrechts in Händen eines ausländischen Staates; Beitrag zur verfassungsmäßig vorausgesetzten Meinungsbildung; Erkenntnistheoretisch-relativistische Auslegung; Erkenntnistheoretischer Ansatz; Art. 5 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 1 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 1 S. 1 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 1 S. 2 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 1 S. 2 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 2 GG; Art. 10 EMRK; Art. 10 Abs. 1 EMRK; Art. 10 MRK; Art. 10 Abs. 1 EMRK; Art. 10 Abs. 2 EMRK; Art. 10 Abs. 1 MRK; Art. 10 Abs. 2 MRK; Art. 17 EMRK; Missbrauchsklausel; Nichtanwendungsmodell; Rechtfertigungsmodell; Abwägung; Schutzbereichsausschluss; Sozialwidrigkeit; Bundesverfassungsgericht; BVerfG; EGMR; Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte; außerargumentative Druckmittel; absurde Meinungen; Schmähkritik; Formalbeleidigung; Holocaust-Leugnung; Konvergenzzeitalter; Medienkonvergenz; Konvergenz; Hybride Medienformen; einförmige Medien; Wahrheitspflicht für Medien; Informationsintermediär; Informationsintermediäre; Informationsintermediärtätigkeiten; Vermittlungstätigkeit; Vermittlung von Inhalten; Antizipierte Aussage; Starke KI; Schwache KI; Zweckveranlasser; Täuschung über die Identität; Täuschung über das Menschsein; Modalitätenwahlfreiheit; Modalitätentäuschung; Kommunikation unter falschem Namen; Kommunikation unter fremdem Namen; Identitätsfiktion; Namenstäuschung; Fingierte Profile; Fake Profile; Fake Profil; Vorspiegeln der Qualität des Menschseins; Vorspiegeln; Meinungsbildung; Schutzbereichsexklusion; Wahrheit; Sozialverträglichkeit; Social Bot-Kommunikation; Desinformation; Desinformationsverbreitung; Allgemeines Gesetz; Allgemeine Gesetze; Sonderrechtstheorie; Sonderrecht; Abwägungslehre; Kombinationslehre; Ehrschutznormen; Theorem der Wechselwirkung; Wechselwirkung; Wechselwirkungslehre; Vermutung zugunsten der freien Rede; Kontextbezogene Auslegung; Meinungsfreundlich; kontextbezogen; Bewusst unwahre Tatsachenbehauptung; Evident unwahre Tatsachenbehauptung; Komplexität; Identifizierbarkeit der betroffenen Person; Pseudonym; pseudonymisiert; anonymisiert; Täuschung über Äußerungsmodalitäten; Äußerungsmodalitäten; Äußerungsmodalität; Künstliche Kommunikationsverbreiter; Anonymität des Äußernden; Alternative Fakten; Zeitungsente; Missinformation; Aussagekontext; Äußerungskontext; Umstände der Äußerung; Zensurverbot; Vorzensur; Art. 5 Abs. 1 S. 3 GG; Einfach-gesetzliche Regulierung de lege lata; Online-Kommunikation; Kennzeichnungspflicht; Impressumspflicht; nutzergerichtete Kennzeichnungspflicht; netzwerkgerichtete Kennzeichnungspflicht; Kennzeichnungspflichten; § 93 Abs. 4 MStV; § 18 Abs. 3 MStV; § 1 Abs. 7 MStV; § 1 Abs. 7 S. 1 MStV; § 1 Abs. 8 MStV; Marktortprinzip; Herkunftslandprinzip; Art. 3 Abs. 2 ECRL; E-Commerce Richtlinie; Telemedium; § 1 Abs. 1 S. 1 TMG; Hinweispflicht; Vereinbarkeit mit höherrangigem Recht; Ausnahmetatbestand Art. 3 Abs. 4 ECRL; Art. 3 Abs. 4 ECRL; Art. 15 ECRL; Art. 14 Abs. 1 b) ECRL; Art. 14 Abs. 1 lit. b) ECRL; Betroffenheit eines bestimmten Dienstes; § 5 f. TMG; § 18 Abs. 1 MStV; Art. 28b AVMD-RL; Art. 28a AVMD-RL; § 97 S. 2 MStV; defizitär; § 21 Abs. 2 TTDSG; § 21 Abs. 3 TTDSG; § 6 TMG; § 93 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 MStV; Transparenzpflicht; Allgemeine Störerhaftung; Host Provider-Haftung; § 1004 BGB analog i.V.m. § 823 Abs. 1 BGB; Quasinegatorischer Unterlassungsanspruch; Selbstregulierung; AGB; Community Standards; Gemeinschaftstandards; Vermittlungsalgorithmus; ultima ratio; Unverzerrte Meinungsbildung; Berufsausübungsfreiheit; Art. 12 Abs. 1 GG; Art. 12 Abs. 1 S. 1 GG; Art. 12 Abs. 1 S. 2 GG; Vereinbarkeit mit Grundrechten; Vereinbarkeit mit der Meinungsfreiheit; Vereinbarkeit mit der Berufsfreiheit; Vereinbarkeit mit der Berufsausübungsfreiheit; Vereinbarkeit mit Unionsrecht; Bot-Verwender; user generated content; API; Application Programming Interface; API; Captcha; ReCaptcha; §§ 242, 259, 260 BGB; Vertragsfreiheit; Art. 2 Abs. 1 GG; Mittelbare Drittwirkung; Reichweite der mittelbaren Drittwirkung; Stadienverbot; Bierdosen-Flashmob; Fraport; Le Corbusier; Atomausstieg; EuGH; Europäischer Gerichtshof; BGH; Bundesgerichtshof; Onlife; Desiderat; unausweichlich; Marktmacht; Kommunikationsmarkt; Quasi-monopolartige Stellung; Quasi-Monopol; Strukturelle Ungleichheit; Öffnung des Verkehrs; Selbstbindung; Öffentliches Forum; Forum Romanum; Rahmenbedingungen öffentlicher Kommunikation; Nutzungsbedingungen; Dienstnutzungsvertrag; Löschung; Löschungen; Zugangssperren; Deplatforming; Sachverhaltsermittlung; Anhörung; Mitteilungspflicht; Mitteilungsbedürfnis; Gegenvorstellung; Prozedurale Anforderungen; Anspruch auf Zugang; Vertragsschluss; Anspruch auf Veröffentlichung; Anspruch auf Mitteilung; Löschungsgründe; Etikettenschwindel; Overblocking; Underblocking; Anreize; Regelungsadressaten; Anspruchsdysbalance; Anspruchsungleichgewicht; Haftungsungleichgewicht; Compliance-Pflichten; Kollateralzensur; Facebook; Instagram; Tik Tok; Twitter; YouTube; Online Safety and Media Regulation Act; Prinzip der doppelten Unverzüglichkeit; Strafbare Falschnachrichten; Plattforminterne Devolution; Brexit; US-amerikanische Präsidentschaftswahl; Trump; Pipi Langstrumpf; Russischer Angriffskrieg; Bundestagswahl; Illusory Truth Effect; Primacy Effect; kognitionswissenschaftlich; Dementi; Nutzeranonymität; vollharmonisierend; Löschfrist; Löschfristen; Telegram; WhatsApp; Koordinierter Bereich; Illegale Inhalte; Art. 14 DSA; Art. 16 DSA; Art. 6 DSA; Art. 8 DSA; Gestuftes Pflichtenprogramm; Haftungsprivilegierung; Öffnungsklausel; Überwachungspflicht; Online-Umfeld; Filterreset; Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen; Basisregulierung; Melde- und Abhilfeverfahren; Notice and take down; Notice and act; Kenntnisnahme; Fiktion; Fiktionsregelung; gesetzliche Fiktion; Begründungspflicht; Meldepflicht; Internes Beschwerdemanagement; Beschwerdemanagement; Gegenvorstellungsverfahren; Art. 20 DSA; § 3b NetzDG; Außergerichtliche Streitbeilegung; Art. 21 DSA; Außergerichtliches Schlichtungsverfahren; Hinweisgeber; Missbräuchliche Verwendung; Online-Schnittstelle; Algorithmentransparenz; Sehr große Online-Plattformen; Risikobewertung; Risikominimierung; Risikominderung; Krisenreaktionsmechanismus; Kriseninterventionsmechanismus; Krisenprotokolle; Kooperative Krisenbewältigung; Datenzugang; Compliance-Abteilung; Transparenzbericht; Transparenzberichtspflicht; Verhaltenskodizes; Sorgfaltspflichten; Art. 11 GrCh; Art. 7 GrCh; Art. 16 GrCh; Hilfsmittel; Grundgesetz; Dualität der deutschen Löschsysteme; Automatisierte Mittel; Multiple-Choice; Online-Plattform; Transparenzüberdruck; Rechtsdurchsetzung; Rechtsdurchsetzungsdefizit; Systemische Risiken; Europäischer Gesetzgeber; Online Advertising and Social Media (Transparency) Bill; Schutzpflichten; Existenzielle Gefährdung; Quasi-Monopolstellung; Kommunikative Chancengerechtigkeit; KI-Verordnung; KI-VO; Trilogverfahren; Siegelpflicht; Like; Tweet; Post; Retweet; künstliche Meinungsverstärker; Meinungsbildungsrelevant; Bot-Beiträge; Hashtag; Kennzeichnungsfrist; Bearbeitungshöchstgrenze; Unverzüglichkeit; Botgesteuert; Claquerque; Bot-Armee; Modalitätenwahl; Fakten-Check; Fakten-Check Agenturen; Debunking; Fakten-Check Bot; Faktenprüfung; Faktenprüfer; Zugang; Kennzeichnung; Kennzeichnungsrecht; Zugangsanspruch; Auskunftsanspruch; Real Name Statute; Kennzeichnungspflicht; Klarnamenspflicht; Klarnamenspflicht im Innenverhältnis; Klarnamensführungspflicht; Klarnamenspflicht im Außenverhältnis; Bestandsdatenauskunft; IP-Adresse; Vorratsdatenspeicherung; Gegendarstellung; Widerruf; Richtigstellung; Verifikation; Verifizierungspflicht; Identitätsdaten; Filtersoftware; Urheberrecht; Schweigespirale; chilling effects; silencing effect; geistige Isolation; Geistiges Atmen; Außenplurale Presse; Binnenpluraler Rundfunk; Außenplural; Binnenplural; Pluralismus; Meinungsvielfalt; Meinungspluralismus; Außergrundrechtliche Erwartung; Vertrauenswürdige Hinweisgeber; Allgemeines Persönlichkeitsrecht; APR; Recht der persönlichen Ehre; Rechtsdurchsetzungsdefizit im Internet; Fake News; Social Bots; Social Networks; Digital Services Act; Network Enforcement Act; Media State Treaty; Artificial Intelligence; AI; DSA; Social Network; video sharing service; Freedom of expression; Media Freedom; Media Freedoms; fundamental right of communication; Fundamental Communication Rights; freedom of the press; broadcast freedom; internet freedom; post factual; post-truth era; internet communication; internet; Participation Web; Web 2.0; Prosumer; Consumer; recipient; Lie; untrue facts; untrue fact; Opinion; statement; claim; algorithm; algorithms; Algorithm Transparency; information selection; filter; filter bubble; filter bubbles; echo chamber; echo chambers; upload filter; anonymity; illusion; illusions; Gatekeeper; serving freedom; communication model; Servant Freedom of Speech; positive freedom; negative freedom; Positive-illiberal understanding of freedom; truth doctrine; contribution formula; Russia Today; RT; RT German; RT Germany; RT France; Sputnik; application extension; domestic legal entity under private law in the hands of a foreign state; Contribution to the constitutionally required formation of opinion; extra-legal expectation; epistemological approach; Epistemological-relativistic approach; Art. 5 GG; Art. 10 ECHR; Art. 17 ECHR; abuse clause; non-application model; justification model; consideration; protection area exclusion; social injustice; Federal Constitutional Court; BVerfG; ECtHR; European Court of Justice; ECJ; European Court of Human Rights; extra-argumentative leverage; absurd opinion; abusive criticism; formal insult; Holocaust denial; convergence; convergence age; Hybrid Media Forms; uniform media; Truthfulness for the media; duty of truth; intermediaries; intermediary activities; mediation activity; mediation of content; Anticipated statement; Strong AI; Weak AI; purpose initiator; identity deception; modality delusion; delusion about being human; Choice of modalities; Communication under a false name; Communication under someone else's name; identity fiction; name deception; fake profiles; forming an opinion; relevant to opinion-forming; Truth; social compatibility; Social bot communication; desinformation; misinformation; disinformation spread; General law; honor protection norms; Presumption in favor of free speech; Contextual interpretation; opinionated; deliberately untrue statement of fact; evidently untrue statement of fact; complexity; identifiability of the data subject; pseudonym; pseudonymised; anonymized; Deception about utterance modalities; utterance modalities; Artificial communication propagators; anonymity of the utterer; Alternate Facts; newspaper duck; statement context; circumstances of the statement; ban on censorship; pre-censorship; legal regulation de lege lata; online communication; labeling requirement; Imprint obligation; user-oriented labeling obligation; network-oriented labeling obligation; § 93 (4) MStV; § 18 (3) MStV; § 1 (7) MStV; § 1 (8) MStV; Market place principle; country of origin principle; Ecommerce Policy; tele medium; Obligation to notify; Compatibility with superior law; in deficit; duty of transparency; General Disturbance Liability; Host Provider Liability; quasi-negatory injunctive relief; self-regulation; Conditions; Terms; General terms and conditions; Community Standards; mediation algorithm; undistorted formation of opinion; Freedom to exercise your profession; bot user; bot content; Captcha; ReCaptcha; API; Application Programming Interface; user generated content; freedom of contract; Telemedia Act; Indirect third-party effect; Stadium ban Decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany; Federal Court of Justice; Onlife; Desiderate; inevitable desiderate; market power; Communications Market; Quasi-monopoly position; Quasi-monopoly; structural inequality; public forum; forum romanum; Framework conditions of public communication; Terms of use; Service usage contract; Deletion; Deplatforming; Access blocks; Fact Finding; Hearing; Obligation to notify; Need to communicate; Countermotion; Procedural requirements for deletions based on community standards; Right of access; Conclusion of contract; Claim for conclusion of contract; Right to publication; Right to notification; Reasons for deletion; Label fraud; Overblocking; Underblocking; Claim imbalance; Liability imbalance; Compliance obligations; Collateral Censorship; Facebook; Instagram; Tik Tok; Twitter; YouTube; Online Safety and Media Regulation Act; Principle of double immediacy; Criminal false information; Intra-platform devolution; Brexit; US presidential election; Trump; Russian war of aggression; Federal elections; Illusory Truth Effect; Primacy Effect; cognitive science effects; dementia; User anonymity; fully harmonizing; Deletion period; Telegram; WhatsApp; coordinated range; illegal content; Graduated duty program; Liability privilege; Opening clause; Monitoring obligation; Online environment; Filter reset; Basic regulation; Notification and redress procedures; Notice and take down; Notice and act; Acknowledgement; fiction regulation; fiction; legal fiction; Duty to give reasons; Obligation to report; Internal complaint management; Complaint management; out-of-court dispute resolution; out-of-court conciliation proceedings; trusted whistleblowers; Misuse; Online interface; Very Large Online Platforms; VLOP; Risk assessment; Risk mitigation; Risk minimization; Systemic risks; Crisis response mechanism; Crisis intervention mechanism; Crisis protocols; Cooperative crisis management; Data access; Compliance Department; Transparency reporting obligation; Transparency Report; Codes of conduct; Due diligence; Right of personality; Right of personal honor; Law Enforcement; Law enforcement deficit; Law enforcement deficit on the Internet; Transparency overprint; Online-Platform; Multiple Choice; automated means; Duality of the German extinguishing systems; Auxiliary means; Fundamental Law; European legislator; Online Advertising and Social Media (Transparency) Bill; Protection obligations; Existential threat; Communicative opportunity equity; Communicative equity; AI Act; AIA; Artificial Intelligence Act; AI Bill; Artificial Intelligence Bill; Trialogue procedure; Trialogue; Sealing obligation; Obligation to seal; Like; Tweet; Retweet; Post; Posting; artificial opinion amplifiers; artificial voice amplifier; technical voice amplifier; Bot posts; hashtag; Marking period; Marking deadline; Maximum processing limit; Processing limit; Immediacy; bot controlled; Claquerque; Bot Army; Modality choice; Fact check; Facts check; Fact check agency; Fact check agencies; Fact check bot; Fact Checking; Fact checker; Fact checkers; Debunking; Acces; Marking; Labelling; Labeling right; Marking right; Right of access; Acces right; Access claim; Right to information; Information claim; Real Name Statute; Claim for information; Obligation to use a clear name; Obligation to use clear names internally; Obligation to use a clear name in the internal relationship; Obligation to use a clear name in the external relationship; Inventory data disclosure; Inventory data information; IP address; Issuing the IP address; Issue of the IP address; Data retention; Retention of data; Counterstatement; Countermeasure; Correction; Rectification; Revocation; Revocation of a statement; Revocation of a statement; Verification of user data; Obligation to verify user data; Identity data; Filter software; Copyright; Copyright law; Silence spiral; Spiral of silence; chilling effects; silencing effect; mental isolation; mental breathing; outer plural; outer plural press; Internal plural; Internal plural Broadcast; Diversity of opinion; Diversity of opinions; Variety of opinions; Pluralism of opinion; Pluralism of opinions; higher-ranking law; European Law; interstate media treaty; video sharing services; Audiovisual Media Services Directive; E-commerce directive
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (XXX, 518 Seiten, Seite DXIX-DLIX), Illustrationen, Diagramme
    Notes:

    Dissertation, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, 2023
  4. „Fake News“ in der Online-Kommunikation
    = “Fake News” in online communication
    Author: Nölscher, Patrick
    Published: 2023

    „Fake News“ bilden seit Menschengedenken ein zentrales Problem für die individuelle und öffentliche Meinungsbildung. Dabei wird die Wirkung verbreiteter Desinformation heutzutage durch die technischen Möglichkeiten im Bereich der... more

     

    „Fake News“ bilden seit Menschengedenken ein zentrales Problem für die individuelle und öffentliche Meinungsbildung. Dabei wird die Wirkung verbreiteter Desinformation heutzutage durch die technischen Möglichkeiten im Bereich der Online-Kommunikation, etwa durch die Echokammern in sozialen Netzwerken oder den Einsatz künstlicher Meinungsverstärker, mitunter noch verstärkt. Effekte von einmal geäußerter Desinformation lassen sich aus kognitionswissenschaftlicher Perspektive nur noch sehr schwer korrigieren. Die Arbeit beschäftigt sich daher mit dem (kommunikations-)grundrechtlichen Schutz vo... For as long as anyone can remember, fake news has been a central problem for the formation of individual and public opinion. Today, the effect of widespread disinformation is amplified by the technical possibilities of online communication, such as echo chambers in social networks or the use of artificial opinion amplifiers. From a cognitive science perspective, it is very difficult to correct the effects of disinformation once it has been expressed. The paper therefore deals with the protection of fake news in online communication under fundamental law on the basis of the case law of the G...

     
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Contributor: Paulus, Andreas (AkademischeR BetreuerIn); Spindler, Gerald (AkademischeR BetreuerIn)
    Language: German
    Media type: Dissertation
    Format: Print
    Subjects: Fake News; Social Bots; Soziale Netzwerke; Soziales Netzwerk; Videosharing-Dienst; Videosharing-Dienste; Medienstaatsvertrag; MStV; Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz; NetzDG; Digital Services Act; DSA; Künstliche Intelligenz; KI; Meinungsfreiheit; Medienfreiheiten; Kommunikationsgrundrecht; Kommunikationsgrundrechte; Mitteilungsfreiheit; Pressefreiheit; Rundfunktfreiheit; Internetfreiheit; Postfaktisch; Postfaktisches Zeitalter; Internetkommunikation; Internet; Mit-Mach-Web; Web 2.0; Prosument; Rezipient; Konsument; Lüge; Lügen; unwahre Tatsachen; unwahre Tatsache; Meinung; Behauptung; Algorithmen; Algorithmus; Informationsselektion; Filter; Filterblasen; Uploadfilter; Anonymität; Täuschung; Täuschungen; Echokammern; Echokammer; Gatekeeper; Dienende Freiheit; Kommunikationsmodell; Dienende Meinungsfreiheit; positive Freiheit; negative Freiheit; Positiv-illiberales Freiheitsverständnis; Wahrheitsdoktrin; Beitragsformel; Russia Today; RT; RT Deutsch; RT France; Sputnik; Anwendungserweiterung; Inländische juristische Personen des Privatrechts in Händen eines ausländischen Staates; Beitrag zur verfassungsmäßig vorausgesetzten Meinungsbildung; Erkenntnistheoretisch-relativistische Auslegung; Erkenntnistheoretischer Ansatz; Art. 5 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 1 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 1 S. 1 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 1 S. 2 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 1 S. 2 GG; Art. 5 Abs. 2 GG; Art. 10 EMRK; Art. 10 Abs. 1 EMRK; Art. 10 MRK; Art. 10 Abs. 1 EMRK; Art. 10 Abs. 2 EMRK; Art. 10 Abs. 1 MRK; Art. 10 Abs. 2 MRK; Art. 17 EMRK; Missbrauchsklausel; Nichtanwendungsmodell; Rechtfertigungsmodell; Abwägung; Schutzbereichsausschluss; Sozialwidrigkeit; Bundesverfassungsgericht; BVerfG; EGMR; Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte; außerargumentative Druckmittel; absurde Meinungen; Schmähkritik; Formalbeleidigung; Holocaust-Leugnung; Konvergenzzeitalter; Medienkonvergenz; Konvergenz; Hybride Medienformen; einförmige Medien; Wahrheitspflicht für Medien; Informationsintermediär; Informationsintermediäre; Informationsintermediärtätigkeiten; Vermittlungstätigkeit; Vermittlung von Inhalten; Antizipierte Aussage; Starke KI; Schwache KI; Zweckveranlasser; Täuschung über die Identität; Täuschung über das Menschsein; Modalitätenwahlfreiheit; Modalitätentäuschung; Kommunikation unter falschem Namen; Kommunikation unter fremdem Namen; Identitätsfiktion; Namenstäuschung; Fingierte Profile; Fake Profile; Fake Profil; Vorspiegeln der Qualität des Menschseins; Vorspiegeln; Meinungsbildung; Schutzbereichsexklusion; Wahrheit; Sozialverträglichkeit; Social Bot-Kommunikation; Desinformation; Desinformationsverbreitung; Allgemeines Gesetz; Allgemeine Gesetze; Sonderrechtstheorie; Sonderrecht; Abwägungslehre; Kombinationslehre; Ehrschutznormen; Theorem der Wechselwirkung; Wechselwirkung; Wechselwirkungslehre; Vermutung zugunsten der freien Rede; Kontextbezogene Auslegung; Meinungsfreundlich; kontextbezogen; Bewusst unwahre Tatsachenbehauptung; Evident unwahre Tatsachenbehauptung; Komplexität; Identifizierbarkeit der betroffenen Person; Pseudonym; pseudonymisiert; anonymisiert; Täuschung über Äußerungsmodalitäten; Äußerungsmodalitäten; Äußerungsmodalität; Künstliche Kommunikationsverbreiter; Anonymität des Äußernden; Alternative Fakten; Zeitungsente; Missinformation; Aussagekontext; Äußerungskontext; Umstände der Äußerung; Zensurverbot; Vorzensur; Art. 5 Abs. 1 S. 3 GG; Einfach-gesetzliche Regulierung de lege lata; Online-Kommunikation; Kennzeichnungspflicht; Impressumspflicht; nutzergerichtete Kennzeichnungspflicht; netzwerkgerichtete Kennzeichnungspflicht; Kennzeichnungspflichten; § 93 Abs. 4 MStV; § 18 Abs. 3 MStV; § 1 Abs. 7 MStV; § 1 Abs. 7 S. 1 MStV; § 1 Abs. 8 MStV; Marktortprinzip; Herkunftslandprinzip; Art. 3 Abs. 2 ECRL; E-Commerce Richtlinie; Telemedium; § 1 Abs. 1 S. 1 TMG; Hinweispflicht; Vereinbarkeit mit höherrangigem Recht; Ausnahmetatbestand Art. 3 Abs. 4 ECRL; Art. 3 Abs. 4 ECRL; Art. 15 ECRL; Art. 14 Abs. 1 b) ECRL; Art. 14 Abs. 1 lit. b) ECRL; Betroffenheit eines bestimmten Dienstes; § 5 f. TMG; § 18 Abs. 1 MStV; Art. 28b AVMD-RL; Art. 28a AVMD-RL; § 97 S. 2 MStV; defizitär; § 21 Abs. 2 TTDSG; § 21 Abs. 3 TTDSG; § 6 TMG; § 93 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 MStV; Transparenzpflicht; Allgemeine Störerhaftung; Host Provider-Haftung; § 1004 BGB analog i.V.m. § 823 Abs. 1 BGB; Quasinegatorischer Unterlassungsanspruch; Selbstregulierung; AGB; Community Standards; Gemeinschaftstandards; Vermittlungsalgorithmus; ultima ratio; Unverzerrte Meinungsbildung; Berufsausübungsfreiheit; Art. 12 Abs. 1 GG; Art. 12 Abs. 1 S. 1 GG; Art. 12 Abs. 1 S. 2 GG; Vereinbarkeit mit Grundrechten; Vereinbarkeit mit der Meinungsfreiheit; Vereinbarkeit mit der Berufsfreiheit; Vereinbarkeit mit der Berufsausübungsfreiheit; Vereinbarkeit mit Unionsrecht; Bot-Verwender; user generated content; API; Application Programming Interface; API; Captcha; ReCaptcha; §§ 242, 259, 260 BGB; Vertragsfreiheit; Art. 2 Abs. 1 GG; Mittelbare Drittwirkung; Reichweite der mittelbaren Drittwirkung; Stadienverbot; Bierdosen-Flashmob; Fraport; Le Corbusier; Atomausstieg; EuGH; Europäischer Gerichtshof; BGH; Bundesgerichtshof; Onlife; Desiderat; unausweichlich; Marktmacht; Kommunikationsmarkt; Quasi-monopolartige Stellung; Quasi-Monopol; Strukturelle Ungleichheit; Öffnung des Verkehrs; Selbstbindung; Öffentliches Forum; Forum Romanum; Rahmenbedingungen öffentlicher Kommunikation; Nutzungsbedingungen; Dienstnutzungsvertrag; Löschung; Löschungen; Zugangssperren; Deplatforming; Sachverhaltsermittlung; Anhörung; Mitteilungspflicht; Mitteilungsbedürfnis; Gegenvorstellung; Prozedurale Anforderungen; Anspruch auf Zugang; Vertragsschluss; Anspruch auf Veröffentlichung; Anspruch auf Mitteilung; Löschungsgründe; Etikettenschwindel; Overblocking; Underblocking; Anreize; Regelungsadressaten; Anspruchsdysbalance; Anspruchsungleichgewicht; Haftungsungleichgewicht; Compliance-Pflichten; Kollateralzensur; Facebook; Instagram; Tik Tok; Twitter; YouTube; Online Safety and Media Regulation Act; Prinzip der doppelten Unverzüglichkeit; Strafbare Falschnachrichten; Plattforminterne Devolution; Brexit; US-amerikanische Präsidentschaftswahl; Trump; Pipi Langstrumpf; Russischer Angriffskrieg; Bundestagswahl; Illusory Truth Effect; Primacy Effect; kognitionswissenschaftlich; Dementi; Nutzeranonymität; vollharmonisierend; Löschfrist; Löschfristen; Telegram; WhatsApp; Koordinierter Bereich; Illegale Inhalte; Art. 14 DSA; Art. 16 DSA; Art. 6 DSA; Art. 8 DSA; Gestuftes Pflichtenprogramm; Haftungsprivilegierung; Öffnungsklausel; Überwachungspflicht; Online-Umfeld; Filterreset; Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen; Basisregulierung; Melde- und Abhilfeverfahren; Notice and take down; Notice and act; Kenntnisnahme; Fiktion; Fiktionsregelung; gesetzliche Fiktion; Begründungspflicht; Meldepflicht; Internes Beschwerdemanagement; Beschwerdemanagement; Gegenvorstellungsverfahren; Art. 20 DSA; § 3b NetzDG; Außergerichtliche Streitbeilegung; Art. 21 DSA; Außergerichtliches Schlichtungsverfahren; Hinweisgeber; Missbräuchliche Verwendung; Online-Schnittstelle; Algorithmentransparenz; Sehr große Online-Plattformen; Risikobewertung; Risikominimierung; Risikominderung; Krisenreaktionsmechanismus; Kriseninterventionsmechanismus; Krisenprotokolle; Kooperative Krisenbewältigung; Datenzugang; Compliance-Abteilung; Transparenzbericht; Transparenzberichtspflicht; Verhaltenskodizes; Sorgfaltspflichten; Art. 11 GrCh; Art. 7 GrCh; Art. 16 GrCh; Hilfsmittel; Grundgesetz; Dualität der deutschen Löschsysteme; Automatisierte Mittel; Multiple-Choice; Online-Plattform; Transparenzüberdruck; Rechtsdurchsetzung; Rechtsdurchsetzungsdefizit; Systemische Risiken; Europäischer Gesetzgeber; Online Advertising and Social Media (Transparency) Bill; Schutzpflichten; Existenzielle Gefährdung; Quasi-Monopolstellung; Kommunikative Chancengerechtigkeit; KI-Verordnung; KI-VO; Trilogverfahren; Siegelpflicht; Like; Tweet; Post; Retweet; künstliche Meinungsverstärker; Meinungsbildungsrelevant; Bot-Beiträge; Hashtag; Kennzeichnungsfrist; Bearbeitungshöchstgrenze; Unverzüglichkeit; Botgesteuert; Claquerque; Bot-Armee; Modalitätenwahl; Fakten-Check; Fakten-Check Agenturen; Debunking; Fakten-Check Bot; Faktenprüfung; Faktenprüfer; Zugang; Kennzeichnung; Kennzeichnungsrecht; Zugangsanspruch; Auskunftsanspruch; Real Name Statute; Kennzeichnungspflicht; Klarnamenspflicht; Klarnamenspflicht im Innenverhältnis; Klarnamensführungspflicht; Klarnamenspflicht im Außenverhältnis; Bestandsdatenauskunft; IP-Adresse; Vorratsdatenspeicherung; Gegendarstellung; Widerruf; Richtigstellung; Verifikation; Verifizierungspflicht; Identitätsdaten; Filtersoftware; Urheberrecht; Schweigespirale; chilling effects; silencing effect; geistige Isolation; Geistiges Atmen; Außenplurale Presse; Binnenpluraler Rundfunk; Außenplural; Binnenplural; Pluralismus; Meinungsvielfalt; Meinungspluralismus; Außergrundrechtliche Erwartung; Vertrauenswürdige Hinweisgeber; Allgemeines Persönlichkeitsrecht; APR; Recht der persönlichen Ehre; Rechtsdurchsetzungsdefizit im Internet; Fake News; Social Bots; Social Networks; Digital Services Act; Network Enforcement Act; Media State Treaty; Artificial Intelligence; AI; DSA; Social Network; video sharing service; Freedom of expression; Media Freedom; Media Freedoms; fundamental right of communication; Fundamental Communication Rights; freedom of the press; broadcast freedom; internet freedom; post factual; post-truth era; internet communication; internet; Participation Web; Web 2.0; Prosumer; Consumer; recipient; Lie; untrue facts; untrue fact; Opinion; statement; claim; algorithm; algorithms; Algorithm Transparency; information selection; filter; filter bubble; filter bubbles; echo chamber; echo chambers; upload filter; anonymity; illusion; illusions; Gatekeeper; serving freedom; communication model; Servant Freedom of Speech; positive freedom; negative freedom; Positive-illiberal understanding of freedom; truth doctrine; contribution formula; Russia Today; RT; RT German; RT Germany; RT France; Sputnik; application extension; domestic legal entity under private law in the hands of a foreign state; Contribution to the constitutionally required formation of opinion; extra-legal expectation; epistemological approach; Epistemological-relativistic approach; Art. 5 GG; Art. 10 ECHR; Art. 17 ECHR; abuse clause; non-application model; justification model; consideration; protection area exclusion; social injustice; Federal Constitutional Court; BVerfG; ECtHR; European Court of Justice; ECJ; European Court of Human Rights; extra-argumentative leverage; absurd opinion; abusive criticism; formal insult; Holocaust denial; convergence; convergence age; Hybrid Media Forms; uniform media; Truthfulness for the media; duty of truth; intermediaries; intermediary activities; mediation activity; mediation of content; Anticipated statement; Strong AI; Weak AI; purpose initiator; identity deception; modality delusion; delusion about being human; Choice of modalities; Communication under a false name; Communication under someone else's name; identity fiction; name deception; fake profiles; forming an opinion; relevant to opinion-forming; Truth; social compatibility; Social bot communication; desinformation; misinformation; disinformation spread; General law; honor protection norms; Presumption in favor of free speech; Contextual interpretation; opinionated; deliberately untrue statement of fact; evidently untrue statement of fact; complexity; identifiability of the data subject; pseudonym; pseudonymised; anonymized; Deception about utterance modalities; utterance modalities; Artificial communication propagators; anonymity of the utterer; Alternate Facts; newspaper duck; statement context; circumstances of the statement; ban on censorship; pre-censorship; legal regulation de lege lata; online communication; labeling requirement; Imprint obligation; user-oriented labeling obligation; network-oriented labeling obligation; § 93 (4) MStV; § 18 (3) MStV; § 1 (7) MStV; § 1 (8) MStV; Market place principle; country of origin principle; Ecommerce Policy; tele medium; Obligation to notify; Compatibility with superior law; in deficit; duty of transparency; General Disturbance Liability; Host Provider Liability; quasi-negatory injunctive relief; self-regulation; Conditions; Terms; General terms and conditions; Community Standards; mediation algorithm; undistorted formation of opinion; Freedom to exercise your profession; bot user; bot content; Captcha; ReCaptcha; API; Application Programming Interface; user generated content; freedom of contract; Telemedia Act; Indirect third-party effect; Stadium ban Decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany; Federal Court of Justice; Onlife; Desiderate; inevitable desiderate; market power; Communications Market; Quasi-monopoly position; Quasi-monopoly; structural inequality; public forum; forum romanum; Framework conditions of public communication; Terms of use; Service usage contract; Deletion; Deplatforming; Access blocks; Fact Finding; Hearing; Obligation to notify; Need to communicate; Countermotion; Procedural requirements for deletions based on community standards; Right of access; Conclusion of contract; Claim for conclusion of contract; Right to publication; Right to notification; Reasons for deletion; Label fraud; Overblocking; Underblocking; Claim imbalance; Liability imbalance; Compliance obligations; Collateral Censorship; Facebook; Instagram; Tik Tok; Twitter; YouTube; Online Safety and Media Regulation Act; Principle of double immediacy; Criminal false information; Intra-platform devolution; Brexit; US presidential election; Trump; Russian war of aggression; Federal elections; Illusory Truth Effect; Primacy Effect; cognitive science effects; dementia; User anonymity; fully harmonizing; Deletion period; Telegram; WhatsApp; coordinated range; illegal content; Graduated duty program; Liability privilege; Opening clause; Monitoring obligation; Online environment; Filter reset; Basic regulation; Notification and redress procedures; Notice and take down; Notice and act; Acknowledgement; fiction regulation; fiction; legal fiction; Duty to give reasons; Obligation to report; Internal complaint management; Complaint management; out-of-court dispute resolution; out-of-court conciliation proceedings; trusted whistleblowers; Misuse; Online interface; Very Large Online Platforms; VLOP; Risk assessment; Risk mitigation; Risk minimization; Systemic risks; Crisis response mechanism; Crisis intervention mechanism; Crisis protocols; Cooperative crisis management; Data access; Compliance Department; Transparency reporting obligation; Transparency Report; Codes of conduct; Due diligence; Right of personality; Right of personal honor; Law Enforcement; Law enforcement deficit; Law enforcement deficit on the Internet; Transparency overprint; Online-Platform; Multiple Choice; automated means; Duality of the German extinguishing systems; Auxiliary means; Fundamental Law; European legislator; Online Advertising and Social Media (Transparency) Bill; Protection obligations; Existential threat; Communicative opportunity equity; Communicative equity; AI Act; AIA; Artificial Intelligence Act; AI Bill; Artificial Intelligence Bill; Trialogue procedure; Trialogue; Sealing obligation; Obligation to seal; Like; Tweet; Retweet; Post; Posting; artificial opinion amplifiers; artificial voice amplifier; technical voice amplifier; Bot posts; hashtag; Marking period; Marking deadline; Maximum processing limit; Processing limit; Immediacy; bot controlled; Claquerque; Bot Army; Modality choice; Fact check; Facts check; Fact check agency; Fact check agencies; Fact check bot; Fact Checking; Fact checker; Fact checkers; Debunking; Acces; Marking; Labelling; Labeling right; Marking right; Right of access; Acces right; Access claim; Right to information; Information claim; Real Name Statute; Claim for information; Obligation to use a clear name; Obligation to use clear names internally; Obligation to use a clear name in the internal relationship; Obligation to use a clear name in the external relationship; Inventory data disclosure; Inventory data information; IP address; Issuing the IP address; Issue of the IP address; Data retention; Retention of data; Counterstatement; Countermeasure; Correction; Rectification; Revocation; Revocation of a statement; Revocation of a statement; Verification of user data; Obligation to verify user data; Identity data; Filter software; Copyright; Copyright law; Silence spiral; Spiral of silence; chilling effects; silencing effect; mental isolation; mental breathing; outer plural; outer plural press; Internal plural; Internal plural Broadcast; Diversity of opinion; Diversity of opinions; Variety of opinions; Pluralism of opinion; Pluralism of opinions; higher-ranking law; European Law; interstate media treaty; video sharing services; Audiovisual Media Services Directive; E-commerce directive
    Scope: 589, Illustrationen, Diagramme
    Notes:

    Dissertation, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, 2023
  5. Persuasion and welfare
    Author: Doval, Laura; Smolin, Alex
    Published: 22 April 2023
    Publisher:  Centre for Economic Policy Research, London

    Access:
    Verlag (lizenzpflichtig)
    Verlag (lizenzpflichtig)

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Signature:
    LZ 161
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    Universitätsbibliothek Mannheim
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Series: Array ; DP18104
    Subjects: Bayesian persuasion; information design; welfare economics; algorithms; information policies
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 44 Seiten), Illustrationen
  6. Fair governance with humans and machines
    Author: Hermstrüwer, Yoan; Langenbach, Pascal
    Published: May 2022
    Publisher:  Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn

    How fair are government decisions based on algorithmic predictions? And to what extent can the government delegate decisions to machines without sacrificing procedural fairness? Using a set of vignettes in the context of predictive policing, school... more

    Access:
    Verlag (kostenfrei)
    Resolving-System (kostenfrei)
    Resolving-System (kostenfrei)

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Signature:
    DS 62
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

     

    How fair are government decisions based on algorithmic predictions? And to what extent can the government delegate decisions to machines without sacrificing procedural fairness? Using a set of vignettes in the context of predictive policing, school admissions, and refugee-matching, we explore how different degrees of human-machine interaction affect fairness perceptions and procedural preferences. We implement four treatments varying the extent of responsibility delegation to the machine and the degree of human involvement in the decision-making process, ranging from full human discretion, machine-based predictions with high human involvement, machine-based predictions with low human involvement, and fully machine-based decisions. We find that machine-based predictions with high human involvement yield the highest and fully machine-based decisions the lowest fairness scores. Different accuracy assessments can partly explain these differences. Fairness scores follow a similar pattern across contexts, with a negative level effect and lower fairness perceptions of human decisions in the context of predictive policing. Our results shed light on the behavioral foundations of several legal human-in-the-loop rules.

     
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Other identifier:
    hdl: 21.11116/0000-000A-80A0-F
    hdl: 10419/274053
    Edition: This version: 23 May 2022
    Series: Discussion papers of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods ; 2022, 4
    Subjects: algorithms; predictive policing; school admissions; refugee-matching; fairness
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 57 Seiten), Illustrationen
  7. Human-algorithm interaction
    algorithmic pricing in hybrid laboratory markets
    Author: Normann, Hans-Theo; Sternberg, Martin
    Published: October 2022
    Publisher:  Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE), Düsseldorf, Germany

    This paper investigates pricing in laboratory markets when human players interact with an algorithm. We compare the degree of competition when exclusively humans interact to the case of one firm delegating its decisions to an algorithm, an n-player... more

    Access:
    Verlag (kostenfrei)
    Resolving-System (kostenfrei)

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Signature:
    DS 256
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

     

    This paper investigates pricing in laboratory markets when human players interact with an algorithm. We compare the degree of competition when exclusively humans interact to the case of one firm delegating its decisions to an algorithm, an n-player generalization of tit-for-tat. We further vary whether participants know about the presence of the algorithm. When one of three firms in a market is an algorithm, we observe significantly higher prices compared to human-only markets. Firms employing an algorithm earn significantly less profit than their rivals. (Un)certainty about the actual presence of an algorithm does not significantly affect collusion, although humans do seem to perceive algorithms as more disruptive.

     
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Ebook
    Format: Online
    ISBN: 9783863043919
    Other identifier:
    hdl: 10419/265530
    Series: Discussion paper / Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE) ; no 392
    Subjects: algorithms; collusion; human-computer interaction; labora-tory experiments
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 56 Seiten), Illustrationen
  8. Beware the performance of an algorithm before relying on it
    evidence from a stock price forecasting experiment
    Author: Tse, Tiffany Tsz Kwan; Hanaki, Nobuyuki; Mao, Bolin
    Published: October 2022
    Publisher:  The Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan

    We experimentally investigated the relationship between participants' reliance on algorithms, their familiarity with the task, and the performance level of the algorithm. We found that when participants could freely decide on their final forecast... more

    Access:
    Verlag (kostenfrei)

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Signature:
    DS 198
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

     

    We experimentally investigated the relationship between participants' reliance on algorithms, their familiarity with the task, and the performance level of the algorithm. We found that when participants could freely decide on their final forecast after observing the one produced by the algorithm (a condition found to mitigate algorithm aversion), the average degree of reliance on high and low performing algorithms did not significantly differ for participants with little experience in the task. Experienced participants relied less on the algorithm than inexperienced participants, regardless of its performance level. The reliance on the low performing algorithm was positive even when participants could infer that they outperformed the algorithm. Indeed, participants would have done better without relying on the low performing algorithm at all. Our results suggest that, at least in some domains, excessive reliance on algorithms, rather than algorithm aversion, should be a concern.

     
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Series: Discussion paper / The Institute of Social and Economic Research ; no. 1194
    Subjects: algorithms; financial market; forecasting; modification; technology adoption
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 89 Seiten), Illustrationen
  9. Similarity and consistency in algorithm-guided exploration
    Author: Bao, Yongping; Danwitz, Ludwig; Dvorak, Fabian; Fehrler, Sebastian; Hornuf, Lars; Lin, Hsuan Yu; Helversen, Bettina von
    Published: December 2022
    Publisher:  CESifo, Munich, Germany

    Algorithm-based decision support systems play an increasingly important role in decisions involving exploration tasks, such as product searches, portfolio choices, and human resource procurement. These tasks often involve a trade-off between... more

    Access:
    Verlag (kostenfrei)
    Verlag (kostenfrei)
    Resolving-System (kostenfrei)

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Signature:
    DS 63
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

     

    Algorithm-based decision support systems play an increasingly important role in decisions involving exploration tasks, such as product searches, portfolio choices, and human resource procurement. These tasks often involve a trade-off between exploration and exploitation, which can be highly dependent on individual preferences. In an online experiment, we study whether the willingness of participants to follow the advice of a reinforcement learning algorithm depends on the fit between their own exploration preferences and the algorithm's advice. We vary the weight that the algorithm places on exploration rather than exploitation, and model the participants' decision-making processes using a learning model comparable to the algorithm's. This allows us to measure the degree to which one's willingness to accept the algorithm's advice depends on the weight it places on exploration and on the similarity between the exploration tendencies of the algorithm and the participant. We find that the algorithm's advice affects and improves participants' choices in all treatments. However, the degree to which participants are willing to follow the advice depends heavily on the algorithm's exploration tendency. Participants are more likely to follow an algorithm that is more exploitative than they are, possibly interpreting the algorithm's relative consistency over time as a signal of expertise. Similarity between human choices and the algorithm's recommendations does not increase humans' willingness to follow the recommendations. Hence, our results suggest that the consistency of an algorithm's recommendations over time is key to inducing people to follow algorithmic advice in exploration tasks.

     
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Other identifier:
    hdl: 10419/271832
    Series: CESifo working papers ; 10188 (2022)
    Subjects: algorithms; decision support systems; recommender systems; advice-taking; multi-armed bandit; search; exploration-exploitation; cognitive modeling
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 50 Seiten), Illustrationen
  10. The Role of Ranking Algorithms in Crowdfunding
    Author: Vana, Prasad; Lambrecht, Anja
    Published: [2022]
    Publisher:  SSRN, [S.l.]

    Online platforms, marketplaces and retailers typically use ranking algorithms to determine the order in which hundreds or thousands of choices are presented to consumers. While ranking algorithms may aid consumer choice, there are concerns they may... more

    Access:
    Verlag (kostenfrei)
    Resolving-System (kostenfrei)

    Location:
    Helmut-Schmidt-Universität, Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg, Universitätsbibliothek
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

     

    Online platforms, marketplaces and retailers typically use ranking algorithms to determine the order in which hundreds or thousands of choices are presented to consumers. While ranking algorithms may aid consumer choice, there are concerns they may also lead to socially undesirable outcomes. In this research, we ask two questions. First, we examine the impact of ranking algorithms on consumer choice and the degree to which researchers may obtain biased estimates of preferences if abstracting from the algorithmic code or the rank order of search results. Second, we ask whether ranking algorithms can further socially desirable outcomes. We use data and the ranking algorithm obtained from the US educational crowdfunding website DonorsChoose and develop a structural model of donors’ contributions using a multiple discrete continuous choice framework. We demonstrate that not accounting for the ranking algorithm leads to a systematic bias in estimated consumer preferences. In two sets of counterfactuals, we then test how well DonorsChoose’s algorithm serves its objectives to both benefit disadvantaged groups and achieve a high rate of project completion. First, we show that removing the parameters from the algorithm that prioritize projects from high and highest poverty schools reduces contributions to such schools by 12.98 percentage points. Second, we find that the inclusion of parameters designed to increase the number of projects that succeed on the platform do not substantially affect overall contributions to projects from schools with high and highest poverty. To the ongoing debate about algorithmic bias, we add empirical evidence that algorithms can positively affect disadvantaged groups without compromising a platform’s overall goals

     
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Other identifier:
    Series: Tuck School of Business Working Paper ; No. 4132785
    Subjects: crowdfunding; algorithms; multiple discrete continuous models; structural models
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (49 p)
    Notes:

    Nach Informationen von SSRN wurde die ursprüngliche Fassung des Dokuments May 31, 2022 erstellt
  11. Sustainable finance and fintech: can technology contribute to achieving environmental goals?
    a preliminary assessment of "Green Fintech"
    Author: Macchiavello, Eugenia; Siri, Michele
    Published: 13/08/2020
    Publisher:  European Banking Institute e.V., Frankfurt am Main, Germany

    The Fintech Action Plan (see now also Digital Finance Strategy) and the Sustainable Finance Strategy both represent important pillars of the current EU policy agenda. Nonetheless, the two areas have been treated as separate for a long time, while... more

    Access:
    Resolving-System (kostenfrei)
    Verlag (kostenfrei)

    Location:
    Helmut-Schmidt-Universität, Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg, Universitätsbibliothek
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Signature:
    VS 636
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

     

    The Fintech Action Plan (see now also Digital Finance Strategy) and the Sustainable Finance Strategy both represent important pillars of the current EU policy agenda. Nonetheless, the two areas have been treated as separate for a long time, while they present certain common features and great potential when combined. In particular, Fintech appears able to respond to some shortcomings in the current sustainable finance framework (e.g. access to retail financing, ESG disclosure, verification and ratings, etc.). The relevance of the link between sustainability, finance and technology has also been evidenced by the COVID-19 pandemic crisis, which has urged all countries to re-think the models traditionally deployed and rely more on technology and sustainability. However, Fintech still raises per se relevant legal issues that need to be addressed to fulfil its promises and potential in the sustainable finance sector. The present paper aims at starting a debate about “Green Fintech” in order to effectively connect the two worlds and spur the research in such a new and promising area

     
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Other identifier:
    Series: EBI working paper series ; no. 71 (2020)
    European Banking Institute Working Paper Series 2020 – ; no. 71
    Subjects: Fintech; Sustainable finance; EcoLabel; blockchain; DLT; artificial intelligence; algorithms; big data; ESG factors; sustainability rating; sustainable development goals; transparency; non-financial disclosure; fiduciary duties; crowdfunding
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 40 Seiten)
  12. Hybrid collusion
    algorithmic pricing in human-computer laboratory markets
    Author: Normann, Hans-Theo; Sternberg, Martin
    Published: May 2021
    Publisher:  Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn

    We investigate collusive pricing in laboratory markets when human players interact with an algorithm. We compare the degree of (tacit) collusion when exclusively humans interact to the case of one firm in the market delegating its decisions to an... more

    Access:
    Verlag (kostenfrei)
    Resolving-System (kostenfrei)
    Resolving-System (kostenfrei)

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Signature:
    DS 62
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan

     

    We investigate collusive pricing in laboratory markets when human players interact with an algorithm. We compare the degree of (tacit) collusion when exclusively humans interact to the case of one firm in the market delegating its decisions to an algorithm. We further vary whether participants know about the presence of the algorithm. We find that threefirm markets involving an algorithmic player are significantly more collusive than human-only markets. Firms employing an algorithm earn significantly less profit than their rivals. For four-firm markets, we find no significant differences. (Un)certainty about the actual presence of an algorithm does not significantly affect collusion.

     
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Other identifier:
    hdl: 21.11116/0000-0008-7A8C-2
    hdl: 10419/245974
    Series: Discussion papers of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods ; 2021, 11
    Subjects: algorithms; collusion; human-computer interaction; laboratory experiments
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 59 Seiten)
  13. Algorithm-augmented work performance and domain experience
    the countervailing forces of ability and aversion
    Author: Allen, Ryan; Choudhury, Prithwiraj
    Published: [2020]
    Publisher:  Harvard Business School, [Boston, MA]

    Access:
    Verlag (kostenfrei)
    Verlag (kostenfrei)

    Location:
    ZBW - Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft, Standort Kiel
    Signature:
    Keine Rechte
    Inter-library loan:
    No inter-library loan
    Export to reference management software   RIS file
      BibTeX file
    Source: Union catalogues
    Language: English
    Media type: Book
    Format: Online
    Series: Working paper / Harvard Business School ; 21, 073
    Subjects: automation; domain experience; algorithmic aversion; experts; algorithms; machine learning; decision-making; future of work
    Scope: 1 Online-Ressource (circa 52 Seiten), Illustrationen