People tend to be hesitant toward algorithmic tools, and this aversion potentially affects how innovations in artificial intelligence (AI) are effectively implemented. Explanatory mechanisms for aversion are based on individual or structural issues but often lack reflection on real-world contexts. Our study addresses this gap through a mixed-method approach, analyzing seven cases of AI deployment and their public reception on social media and in news articles. Using the Contextual Integrity framework, we argue that most often it is not the AI technology that is perceived as problematic, but that processes related to transparency, consent, and lack of influence by individuals raise aversion. Future research into aversion should acknowledge that technologies cannot be extricated from their contexts if they aim to understand public perceptions of AI innovation.
LINK
This study analyses how the social construction of integrity takes place within the context of football in the Netherlands. Combining a contextual approach to sports integrity with the analytic lens of sensemaking, this qualitative multi-method case study analyses – in one extreme case in Dutch youth amateur football – why and when the ‘incident’ was perceived as an ‘integrity issue’, and how the meaning of (the) integrity (issue) was socially constructed by (interactions between) stakeholders involved in the case. Our findings show why, when, and how moral norms and values are (not) debated and at stake, and that the social construction of sports integrity is intertwined with the institutional context and the role of secondary stakeholders. It provides insights that can help sports organizations to identify risks in their moral sports culure and to develop measures or policies to safeguard integrity in sport.
DOCUMENT
Background: Successful implementation of multifactorial fall prevention interventions (FPIs) is essential to reduce increasing fall rates in communitydwelling older adults. However, implementation often fails due to the complex context of the community involving multiple stakeholders within and across settings, sectors, and organizations. As there is a need for a better understanding of the occurring context-related challenges, the current scoping review purposes to identify what contextual determinants (i.e., barriers and facilitators) influence the implementation of FPIs in the community. Methods: A scoping reviewwas performed using the Arksey andO’Malley framework. First, electronic databases (Pubmed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO) were searched. Studies that identified contextual determinants that influence the implementation of FPIs in the community were included. Second, to both validate the findings from the literature and identify complementary determinants, health and social care professionals were consulted during consensus meetings (CMs) in four districts in the region of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Data were analyzed following a directed qualitative content analysis approach, according to the 39 constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Results: Fourteen relevant studies were included and 35 health and social care professionals (such as general practitioners, practice nurses, and physical therapists) were consulted during four CMs. Directed qualitative content analysis of the included studies yielded determinants within 35 unique constructs operating as barriers and/or facilitators. The majority of the constructs (n = 21) were identified in both the studies and CMs, such as “networks and communications”, “formally appointed internal implementation leaders”, “available resources” and “patient needs and resources”. The other constructs (n = 14) were identified only in the . Discussion: Findings in this review show that awide array of contextual determinants are essential in achieving successful implementation of FPIs in the community. However, some determinants are considered important to address, regardless of the context where the implementation occurs. Such as accounting for time constraints and financial limitations, and considering the needs of older adults. Also, broad cross-sector collaboration and coordination are required in multifactorial FPIs. Additional context analysis is always an essential part of implementation efforts, as contexts may differ greatly, requiring a locally tailored approach.
DOCUMENT