Measurement as Bricolage: Examining How Data Scientists Construct Target Variables for Predictive Modeling Tasks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Data scientists often formulate predictive modeling tasks involving fuzzy, hard-to-define concepts, such as the "authenticity" of student writing or the "healthcare need" of a patient. Yet the process by which data scientists translate fuzzy concepts into a concrete, proxy target variable remains poorly understood. We interview fifteen data scientists in education (N=8) and healthcare (N=7) to understand how they construct target variables for predictive modeling tasks. Our findings suggest that data scientists construct target variables through a bricolage process, in which they use creative and pragmatic approaches to make do with the limited data at hand. Data scientists attempt to satisfy five major criteria for a target variable through bricolage: validity, simplicity, predictability, portability, and resource requirements. To achieve this, data scientists adaptively apply problem (re)formulation strategies, such as swapping out one candidate target variable for another when the first fails to meet certain criteria (e.g., predictability), or composing multiple outcomes into a single target variable to capture a more holistic set of modeling objectives. Based on our findings, we present opportunities for future HCI, CSCW, and ML research to better support the art and science of target variable construction.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 58 of its 151 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Jul 2025.
Builds on
58 of 151 references.
References · 58
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,386
- 2023HuggingGPT: Solving AI Tasks with ChatGPT and its Friends in Hugging Facecited by 1,190
- 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,080
- 2021AI and the Everything in the Whole Wide World Benchmarkcited by 349
- 2019Measurement and Fairnesscited by 308
- 2018Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?cited by 262
- 2019The What-If Tool: Interactive Probing of Machine Learning Modelscited by 207
- 2022Data Cards: Purposeful and Transparent Dataset Documentation for Responsible AIcited by 171
- 2018Aequitas: A Bias and Fairness Audit Toolkitcited by 147
- 2024Who Validates the Validators? Aligning LLM-Assisted Evaluation of LLM Outputs with Human Preferencescited by 144
- 2020DoWhy: An End-to-End Library for Causal Inferencecited by 95
38 more
- 2019FairVis: Visual Analytics for Discovering Intersectional Bias in Machine Learningcited by 93
- 2022The Fallacy of AI Functionalitycited by 88
- 2019Problem Formulation and Fairnesscited by 85
- 2023Fairlearn: Assessing and Improving Fairness of AI Systemscited by 74
- 2022Is Your Toxicity My Toxicity? Exploring the Impact of Rater Identity on Toxicity Annotationcited by 69
- 2020How do Data Science Workers Collaborate? Roles, Workflows, and Toolscited by 64
- 2019FairSight: Visual Analytics for Fairness in Decision Makingcited by 59
- 2021Collaboration Challenges in Building ML-Enabled Systems: Communication, Documentation, Engineering, and Processcited by 56
- 2022Improving Human-AI Partnerships in Child Welfare: Understanding Worker Practices, Challenges, and Desires for Algorithmic Decision Supportcited by 39
- 2025Medical Large Language Model Benchmarks Should Prioritize Construct Validitycited by 38
- 2024Human-Centered Design Recommendations for LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 37
- 2022Exploring How Machine Learning Practitioners (Try To) Use Fairness Toolkitscited by 34
- 2023Zeno: An Interactive Framework for Behavioral Evaluation of Machine Learningcited by 33
- 2020Dataset Discovery in Data Lakescited by 31
- 2021Benchmarking emergency department triage prediction models with machine learning and large public electronic health recordscited by 31
- 2019How Data Scientists Work Together With Domain Experts in Scientific Collaborations: To Find The Right Answer Or To Ask The Right Question?cited by 30
- 2022A Validity Perspective on Evaluating the Justified Use of Data-driven Decision-making Algorithmscited by 30
- 2021What are you optimizing for? Aligning Recommender Systems with Human Valuescited by 29
- 2023Understanding Frontline Workers' and Unhoused Individuals' Perspectives on AI Used in Homeless Servicescited by 29
- 2024ECBD: Evidence-Centered Benchmark Design for NLPcited by 28
- 2023Ground(less) Truth: A Causal Framework for Proxy Labels in Human-Algorithm Decision-Makingcited by 25
- 2024Evaluating Generative AI Systems is a Social Science Measurement Challengecited by 23
- 2020From Optimizing Engagement to Measuring Valuecited by 21
- 2021Increasing the Speed and Accuracy of Data LabelingThrough an AI Assisted Interfacecited by 21
- 2024The Situate AI Guidebook: Co-Designing a Toolkit to Support Multi-Stakeholder Early-stage Deliberations Around Public Sector AI Proposalscited by 15
- 2025Prompting in the Dark: Assessing Human Performance in Prompt Engineering for Data Labeling When Gold Labels Are Absentcited by 15
- 2024EXMOS: Explanatory Model Steering Through Multifaceted Explanations and Data Configurationscited by 14
- 2019Goals, Process, and Challenges of Exploratory Data Analysis: An Interview Studycited by 11
- 2023Multi-Target Multiplicity: Flexibility and Fairness in Target Specification under Resource Constraintscited by 11
- 2021Orienting, Framing, Bridging, Magic, and Counseling: How Data Scientists Navigate the Outer Loop of Client Collaborations in Industry and Academiacited by 10
- 2023Counterfactual Prediction Under Outcome Measurement Errorcited by 10
- 2024Are We Asking the Right Questions?: Designing for Community Stakeholders' Interactions with AI in Policingcited by 10
- 2025AI Mismatches: Identifying Potential Algorithmic Harms Before AI Developmentcited by 10
- 2023Judgment Sieve: Reducing Uncertainty in Group Judgments through Interventions Targeting Ambiguity versus Disagreementcited by 8
- 2023An Empirical Analysis of Racial Categories in the Algorithmic Fairness Literaturecited by 8
- 2024Designing Staged Evaluation Workflows for LLMs: Integrating Domain Experts, Lay Users, and Model-Generated Evaluation Criteriacited by 8
- 2021Hypothesis Formalization: Empirical Findings, Software Limitations, and Design Implicationscited by 7
- 2025Tempo: Helping Data Scientists and Domain Experts Collaboratively Specify Predictive Modeling Taskscited by 6
50 most cited of 58 All 58 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.