China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Learning Engineering is Ethical
Published in Jim Goodell, Janet Kolodner, Learning Engineering Toolkit, 2023
Value Sensitive Design. Friedman and colleagues define value sensitive design as “a theoretically grounded approach to the design of technology that accounts for human values in a principled and comprehensive manner throughout the design pro-cess.” 43 Values must be included throughout the iteration of the design process (out-lined in Chapter 1), which incorporates conceptual, empirical, and technical aspects of the process. According to value sensitive design, the three kinds of investigations can be defined as: Conceptual: Specifying the fundamental values that are relevant to design, thereby providing a common point of comparison for all members of a design teamEmpirical: Using qualitative and quantitative methods adopted from the social sciences to examine how technology works within the implementation contextTechnical: Examining the extent to which specific technologies support or interfere with the realization of human values (retroactive analysis) or design technologies to support values that have been identified within the conceptual design phase
Designing Care Robots with Care
Published in Aimee Van Wynsberghe, Healthcare Robots, 2016
The argument remains that values are manifest during and through, the use of a technology. From this idea certain researchers have concluded that if a technology can realize a value (i.e. can bring a value into existence) then we should be able to intentionally design technologies to realize specified values of ethical importance. This idea led to the approach known as Value-Sensitive Design (VSD) (Friedman et al., 2006). Value Sensitive Design is a computer ethics approach dedicated to systematically incorporating a list of 12 ethical values into computer systems.
The Details of Technological Design
Published in Ilse Oosterlaken, Technology and Human Development, 2015
Let’s start with sub-challenge [a]. This challenge can be expected to be extra salient in many ‘design for development’ or ‘humanitarian engineering’ projects, where often Western designers and engineers have to contribute to the well-being of people in a culture and context that they hardly know. Can the capability approach provide help here? Sen leaves it rather open which capabilities constitute well-being, while Nussbaum’s version of the capability approach provides more guidance. However, a feature of Nussbaum’s list of ten intrinsically valuable categories of capabilities is its ‘multiple realizability’ (Nussbaum 2000: 105). It still needs to be investigated what these rather abstract capabilities, such as the capability for play or affiliation, could mean exactly in the context or culture for which the design is meant. Moreover, the effect of new technologies on human capabilities, so the introductory chapter already argued, is dynamic and complex. They do not only depend on the design itself, but also on how the technology is embedded in its socio-technical context (as will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter). Designers need to be aware that this is the case and try to gain an understanding both of the relevance and meaning of certain capabilities and of the context of implementation for their design. Design for capabilities thus requires, as Van de Poel (2012: 301) remarks for design for well-being in general, ‘more than just the identification of user demands by means of surveys or marketing research’. It requires – in the terminology of the Value Sensitive Design approach – extensive and integrated conceptual, technical and empirical investigations. Of course for both practical and epistemic reasons it is not realistic to expect designers to anticipate and take into account all possible capability impacts of their design. The work of designers will at a certain point need to become focused on the capabilities, conversion factors and issues that seem most salient and relevant to the design challenge in question.
Design for values and the city
Published in Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2021
With these broader trends in mind, this paper specifically explores how the theories and practices of value sensitive design (VSD) and design for values (DfV) – as one framework through which to approach to responsible innovation1 – can be applied to the city; or more precisely, to the analysis of urban technologies. While value-sensitive approaches are often advocated for in literature on responsible innovation, the full potential of VSD and DfV as universally applicable approaches to technology design has yet to be realized. ‘It remains an open practical question how (if at all) the theory and method of value sensitive design developed primarily with information technologies will need to be adapted or extended to account for human values in the design process of other non-information technology’ (Friedman and Hendry 2019, 21). Yet despite the relative nascency of these methodologies, recent years have seen their exploration and application to a variety of domains (e.g. van den Hoven, Vermaas, and van de Poel 2015). Relevant to the current inquiry, this has included analyses focused on architecture (Schrijver 2015; van den Hoven 2013a), housing (Elsinga et al. 2020), energy controversies (Dignum et al. 2016), and public participation in urban planning (Friedman and Hendry 2019). However, a focused consideration of how VSD and DfV methodologies can be operationalized for the scale and problems of urban technologies has yet to be explicitly undertaken.
Seven HCI Grand Challenges
Published in International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2019
Constantine Stephanidis, Gavriel Salvendy, Margherita Antona, Jessie Y. C. Chen, Jianming Dong, Vincent G. Duffy, Xiaowen Fang, Cali Fidopiastis, Gino Fragomeni, Limin Paul Fu, Yinni Guo, Don Harris, Andri Ioannou, Kyeong-ah (Kate) Jeong, Shin’ichi Konomi, Heidi Krömker, Masaaki Kurosu, James R. Lewis, Aaron Marcus, Gabriele Meiselwitz, Abbas Moallem, Hirohiko Mori, Fiona Fui-Hoon Nah, Stavroula Ntoa, Pei-Luen Patrick Rau, Dylan Schmorrow, Keng Siau, Norbert Streitz, Wentao Wang, Sakae Yamamoto, Panayiotis Zaphiris, Jia Zhou
With respect to societal aspects of HCI research, Hochheiser and Lazar (2007) in “HCI and Societal Issues: A Framework for Engagement”, define the factors and mechanisms which underlie HCI responses to societal demands and call for proactive and principled engagement in design. Along these lines, Value Sensitive Design uses explicit consideration of specific values as a means of achieving goals – such as democracy, fairness, inclusion, and appropriate use of technology – by addressing questions such as: which values are important in a given design case; whose values are they and how are they defined with respect to the given context; which methods are suited to discover, elicit and define values; what kind of social science knowledge or skills are needed; etc. (Friedman, Kahn, Borning, & Huldtgren, 2013).
The moral psychology of value sensitive design: the methodological issues of moral intuitions for responsible innovation
Published in Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2018
Value Sensitive Design is an approach to the design of technology that seeks to account for human values during the design phases (Friedman and Kahn 2002). Originating in the domain of Human–Computer Interaction (HCI), VSD has since been developed as a proposed approach to the responsible innovation of many different technologies such as identity technologies (Briggs and Thomas 2015), energy technologies (Aad Correljé, Eefje Cuppen, Marloes Dignum 2015), information and communication technology (ICT) (Dechesne, Warnier, and van den Hoven 2013; Friedman 1997; Friedman et al. 2013; Huldtgren 2014; van den Hoven 2007) and nanotechnology (Timmermans, Zhao, and van den Hoven 2011; van den Hoven 2014).