The term algorithmic governance describes institutional steering effects of algorithmic-selection applications that increasingly pervade all domains of everyday life. Empirical evidence on algorithmic governance is lacking and mostly limited to information services. This article compares the significance of algorithmic governance – measured by use, subjective significance, awareness, risk awareness, and coping practices – for four pivotal life domains (information, recreation, commercial transactions, and socializing). Drawing on qualitative, semi-structured interviews with Internet users, this article reveals important nuances in how differently users engage with algorithmic-selection applications across life domains and functional types like search or recommendation. While awareness of algorithmic selection and related risks is comparatively higher for information services, the findings reveal a significant lack of knowledge for algorithmic selection in other life domains and for specific algorithmic modes of operation. This article provides input for an evidence-based development of suitable regulation of algorithmic-selection applications, taking everyday practices of their users into account.

中文翻译：

---

相识又有差别！关于算法选择应用程序如何管理不同生活领域的定性证据

算法治理一词描述了算法选择应用程序的制度导向效应，这些应用程序越来越普遍地渗透到日常生活的所有领域。缺乏关于算法治理的经验证据，并且主要限于信息服务。本文比较了算法治理的重要性——通过使用、主观意义、意识、风险意识和应对实践来衡量——对于四个关键的生活领域（信息、娱乐、商业交易和社交）。本文利用对互联网用户的定性半结构化访谈，揭示了用户在生活领域和搜索或推荐等功能类型中与算法选择应用程序的互动方式有何不同的重要细微差别。虽然信息服务对算法选择和相关风险的认识相对较高，但调查结果表明，在其他生活领域和特定算法操作模式方面严重缺乏算法选择知识。本文为算法选择应用程序的适当监管的循证开发提供输入，同时考虑到用户的日常实践。