English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article makes two key contributions to methodological debates inautomation research. First, we argue for and demonstrate how methods in thisfield must account for intersections of social difference, such as race, class,ethnicity, culture, and disability, in more nuanced ways. Second, we considerthe complexities of bringing together computational and qualitative methods inan intersectional methodological approach while also arguing that in theirrespective subjects (machines and human subjects) and conceptual scope theyenable a specific dialogue on intersectionality and automation to bearticulated. We draw on field reflections from a project that combines ananalysis of intersectional bias in language models with findings from acommunity workshop on the frustrations and aspirations produced throughengagement with everyday AI-driven technologies in the context of care.

Intersectional Inquiry, on the Ground and in the Algorithm