The algorithmic personalization paradox: gig workers' lived experiences of supportive coaches and micromanaging bosses
Pradip Kumar Nanda
What the paper says
Purpose The article challenges the irony of algorithmic personalization, in which gig workers are subjected to a custom-made algorithm that alternates between the roles of a helpful tutor and a micromanaging boss. Design/methodology/approach It uses qualitative interviews with 22 respondents to examine the duality in the context of self-determination theory. Findings The results suggest that algorithmic personalization can fulfil and frustrate the two basic psychological needs of autonomy and competence; employees are actively using adaptive mechanisms to resolve the conflict. In theory, the article provides a psychologically based model that explains the pernicious nature of algorithmic personalization and underscores the urgency of designing algorithms in a human-centred manner for practice-based interventions. Research limitations/implications Theoretically, the article contributes a psychologically grounded model explaining these divergent outcomes. Practical implications Practically, it advocates for human-centric algorithmic design. Originality/value The originality of the study lies in its re-evaluation of the autonomy-versus-control paradox, understanding it in light of personalization, and thus shedding light on the subjective psychological dynamics that either make technology empowering or oppressive.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.