Verso una dittatura del rating? I rischi di un uso spregiudicato del feedback

Titolo Rivista SOCIOLOGIA E RICERCA SOCIALE
Autori/Curatori Daniele Archibugi, Natalia Tosoni
Anno di pubblicazione 2024 Fascicolo 2024/133
Lingua Italiano Numero pagine 22 P. 5-26 Dimensione file 246 KB
DOI 10.3280/SR2024-133001
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

Digital technologies have facilitated the generation of feedback on the per- formance of products and services, thereby reducing existing informational asymmetries and enhancing the effectiveness of the «voice» evoked by Albert Hirschman. Is there a risk that feedback and ratings could become so invasive as to threaten individuals’ privacy? Let’s distinguish between three types of feedback: 1) bottom-up dynamics, where many individuals evaluate and com- ment on the performance of organizations; 2) peer-to-peer, when a series of individuals, in the same hierarchical position, exchange comments and mutual evaluations; 3) top-down, which is obtained when organizations assign a rating to individuals.

  1. J. Adelman (2014), Worldly philosopher: the odyssey of Albert O. Hirschman, Princeton, Prin- ceton University Press.
  2. G.A. Akerlof (1970), «The market for “lemons”: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism», Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84, 3, pp. 488-500.
  3. A.R. Andreasen (1985), «Consumer responses to dissatisfaction in loose monopolies», Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 2, pp. 135-41.
  4. D. Archibugi, A.E. Benli (2017), Claiming Citizenship Rights in Europe, London, Routledge.
  5. M.L. Barnett, J.M. Jermier, B.A. Lafferty (2006), «Corporate reputation: the definitional landscape», Corporate Reputation Review, 9, pp. 26-38.
  6. Barry (1974), «Exit, voice, and loyalty», British Journal of Political Science, 4, 1, pp. 79-107.
  7. M.R. Bashshur, B. Oc (2015), «When voice matters: A multilevel review of the impact of voice in organizations», Journal of Management, 41, 5, pp. 1530-54.
  8. P. Bleicher (2006), «Web 2.0 revolution: power to the people», Applied Clinical Trials, 15, 8, pp. 34-6.
  9. F. Bria (2020), Putting tech and innovation at the service of people and the green transition, London, Ucl Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose.
  10. E. Constantinides, S.J. Fountain (2008), «Web 2.0: Conceptual foundations and marketing is- sues», Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 9, pp. 231-44.
  11. R. Creemers (2018), China’s Social Credit System: an evolving practice of control, -- https:// papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3175792.
  12. A. Diekmann, B. Jann, W. Przepiorka, S. Wehrli (2014), «Reputation formation and the evolution of cooperation in anonymous online markets», American Sociological Review, 79, 1, pp. 65-85.
  13. X. Ding, D.Y. Zhong (2021), «Rethinking China’s Social Credit System: A long road to esta- blishing trust in Chinese society», Journal of Contemporary China, 30, 130, pp. 630-44.
  14. W. Duan, B. Gu, A.B. Whinston (2008), «Do online reviews matter? An empirical investigation of panel data», Decision Support Systems, 45, 4, pp. 1007-16.
  15. E. Estellés-Arolas, F. González-Ladrón-de-Guevara (2012), «Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition», Journal of Information Science, 38, 2, pp. 189-200.
  16. I. Gagliardone, D. Gal, T. Alves, G. Martinez (2015), Countering online hate speech, Paris, Unesco Publishing.
  17. J. Gray (2021), «The geopolitics of “platforms”: The TikTok challenge», Internet Policy Review, 10, 2, pp. 1-26.
  18. A.O. Hirschman (1967), Development projects observed, Washington (DC), The Brookings Institution.
  19. A.O. Hirschman (1970), Exit, voice, and loyalty: responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states, Cambridge, Harvard University Press; tr. it. Lealtà, defezione, protesta. Rimedi alla crisi delle imprese, dei partiti e dello Stato, Bologna, il Mulino, 2017.
  20. A.O. Hirschman (1977), The passions and the interests: political arguments for capitalism before its triumph, Princeton, Princeton University Press; tr. it. Le passioni e gli interessi. Argomenti politici in favore del capitalismo prima del suo trionfo, Milano, Feltrinelli, 1979.
  21. J. Lees-Marshment B. Conley, E. Elder, R. Pettitt, V. Raynauld, A. Turcotte (2019), Political marketing. Principles and applications, London, Routledge.
  22. E. Keen, M. Georgescu, R. Gomes (2020), A manual for combating hate speech online through human rights education, Strasbourg, Council of Europe.
  23. G. Kostka (2019), «China’s social credit systems and public opinion: explaining high levels of approval», New Media & Society, 21, 7, pp. 1565-93.
  24. E.P. Lim, V. A. Nguyen, N. Jindal, B. Liu, H.W. Lauw (2010, October), Detecting product review spammers using rating behaviors, in Proceedings of the 19th Acm International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, New York, Association for Com- puting Machinery.
  25. Liu (2019), «Multiple social credit systems in China», Economic Sociology: The European Electronic Newsletter, 21, 1, pp. 22-32.
  26. Mac Síthigh, M. Siems (2019), «The Chinese social credit system: A model for other coun- tries?», The Modern Law Review, 82, 6, pp. 1034-71.
  27. I. Manokha (2018), «Surveillance: the Dna of platform capital. The case of Cambridge Analyti- ca put into perspective», Theory & Event, 21, 4, pp. 891-913.
  28. T. O’Reilly (2007), «What is web 2.0: design patterns and business models for the next genera- tion of software», Communications & Strategies, 65, 1, pp. 17-37.
  29. G. Origgi (2019), Reputation: what it is and why it matters, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
  30. G. Pacella (2017), «Il lavoro nella gig economy e le recensioni on line: come si ripercuote sui e sulle dipendenti il gradimento dell’utenza?», Labour & Law Issues, 3, 1, pp. 1-34.
  31. M. Pan (2023), «Discussion of online reviews’ impacts on consumers’ behaviors», Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 13, pp. 219-25.
  32. F. Pasquale (2015), «Reforming the law of reputation», Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, 47, pp. 515-40.
  33. A. Pease (2017), The «right to be forgotten»: Asserting control over our digital identity or rewriting history?, in D. Archibugi, A.E. Benli, Claiming Citizenship Rights in Europe, London, Routledge.
  34. K. Popper (1996), Cattiva maestra televisione, Roma, Donzelli.
  35. S. Rodotà (2009), Data protection as a fundamental right, in S. Gutwirth, Y. Poullet, P. De Hert,
  36. C. de Terwangne, S. Nouwt, Reinventing data protection?, Dordrecht, Springer Netherlands.
  37. J. Singh (1990), «Voice, exit, and negative word-of-mouth behaviors: An investigation across three service categories», Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18, pp. 1-15.
  38. G.J. Stigler (1961), «The economics of information», Journal of Political Economy, 69, 3, pp. 213-25.
  39. S. Tadelis (2016), «Reputation and feedback systems in online platform markets», Annual Re- view of Economics, 8, pp. 321-40.
  40. C. Zhang (2020), «Governing (through) trustworthiness: technologies of power and subjectifi- cation in China’s social credit system», Critical Asian Studies, 52, 4, pp. 565-88.
  41. S. Zuboff (2019), The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power, London, Profile Books; tr. it. Il capitalismo della sorveglianza. Il futuro dell’umanità nell’era dei nuovi poteri, Roma, Luiss, 2023.

Daniele Archibugi, Natalia Tosoni, Verso una dittatura del rating? I rischi di un uso spregiudicato del feedback in "SOCIOLOGIA E RICERCA SOCIALE " 133/2024, pp 5-26, DOI: 10.3280/SR2024-133001