The Algorithmic Transparency Paradox How Algorithmic Control And Job Demands Drive Turnover Intention Among Digital Platform Workers
Abstract
The growing penetration of digital work platforms in non-metropolitan Indonesian cities raises critical questions about the impact of algorithmic management on worker well-being and retention. This study examines the effects of algorithmic control and job demands on turnover intention, as well as the moderating role of algorithmic transparency, among digital platform workers in Kepanjen, Malang Regency. Grounded in Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Theory and Algorithmic Management Theory, this study employs an explanatory quantitative approach with a cross-sectional design. Data were collected from 80 active platform workers and analyzed using Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA). Results indicate that algorithmic control had no significant effect on turnover intention (β = 0.231, p = 0.163), suggesting algorithmic accommodation driven by limited employment alternatives in non-metropolitan cities (H1 not supported). Job demands significantly and positively predicted turnover intention (β = 0.579, p < 0.001), emerging as the strongest predictor (H2 supported). Algorithmic transparency did not moderate the algorithmic control–turnover intention relationship (H3 not supported). However, the job demands×algorithmic transparency interaction was significant yet counter-directional (β = +0.262, p = 0.041), revealing a transparency paradox whereby greater clarity about algorithmic demands sharpens rather than reduces exit intentions (H4 not supported directionally). The full model explained 41.5% of variance (R² = 0.415, p < 0.001). Theoretically, this study extends JD-R Theory into algorithmic work contexts in developing economies and introduces the algorithmic transparency paradox as an original contribution to Algorithmic Management Theory a condition in which greater algorithmic transparency exacerbates exit intentions when job demands are high. Practically, findings recommend that digital platform operators design transparency mechanisms coupled with genuine worker agency, including formal appeal channels and algorithmic target calibration that accounts for local infrastructure conditions. For labor regulators, results support the urgency of regulations that mandate algorithmic accountability standards and periodic audits of platform algorithmic systems in Indonesia.
References
Aiken Stephen G West, L. S., & Raymond Reno, by R. (n.d.). MULTIPLE REGRESSION: Testing and Interpreting Interactions With contributions.
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands-resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056
Bujold, A., Parent-Rocheleau, X., & Gaudet, M. C. (2022). Opacity behind the wheel: The relationship between transparency of algorithmic management, justice perception, and intention to quit among truck drivers. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100245
Cameron, L. D., & Rahman, H. (2022). Expanding the Locus of Resistance: Understanding the Co-constitution of Control and Resistance in the Gig Economy. Organization Science, 33(1), 38–58. https://doi.org/10.1287/ORSC.2021.1557
Creswell. J.W. (2009). reserarch design.
Duggan, J., Sherman, U., Carbery, R., & McDonnell, A. (2020). Algorithmic management and app-work in the gig economy: A research agenda for employment relations and HRM. In Human Resource Management Journal (Vol. 30, Number 1, pp. 114–132). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12258
Griesbach, K., Reich, A., Elliott-Negri, L., & Milkman, R. (2019). Algorithmic Control in Platform Food Delivery Work. Socius, 5. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023119870041
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. In European Business Review (Vol. 31, Number 1, pp. 2–24). Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
Jarrahi, M. H., Newlands, G., Lee, M. K., Wolf, C. T., Kinder, E., & Sutherland, W. (2021). Algorithmic management in a work context. Big Data and Society, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211020332
Kadolkar, I., Kepes, S., & Subramony, M. (2025). Algorithmic management in the gig economy: A systematic review and research integration. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 46(7), 1057–1080. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2831
Kellogg, K. C., Valentine, M. A., & Christin, A. (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 366–410. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0174
Langer, M., König, C. J., & Busch, V. (2021). Changing the means of managerial work: effects of automated decision support systems on personnel selection tasks. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(5), 751–769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-020-09711-6
Lwanga, S. K., & Lemeshow, S. (1991). Sample size determination in health studies.
Mazzetti, G., Robledo, E., Vignoli, M., Topa, G., Guglielmi, D., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2023). Work Engagement: A meta-Analysis Using the Job Demands-Resources Model. In Psychological Reports (Vol. 126, Number 3, pp. 1069–1107). SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941211051988
Möhlmann, M., & Zalmanson, L. (2017). Navigating Algorithmic Management and Drivers.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Saunders. M.N.K, Lewis. P, & Thornhill. A. (2023). research methods.
Shrestha, Y. R., Ben-Menahem, S. M., Von Krogh, G., & Zurich, E. (2019). Organizational Decision-Making Structures in the Age of AI. In California Management Review (Vol. 61, Number 4).
Towards Green, Resilient and Inclusive Digitalization. (2022). www.worldbank.org
Veen, A., Meijerink, J., Barratt, T., Keegan, A., & Goods, C. (2025). Overcoming legitimacy challenges of novel HRM practices during internationalization: The case of two food-delivery platforms. Journal of World Business, 60(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2024.101611
Wiener, M., Cram, W. A., & Benlian, A. (2023). Algorithmic control and gig workers: a legitimacy perspective of Uber drivers. European Journal of Information Systems, 32(3), 485–507. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2021.1977729
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Muh. Fahmi Firdaus, Moch. Abd Goffar, Moch. Abdul Aziz, Masrohul Yasar, Ahmad Ramadhani, Niki Puspita Sarif

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

