How to see values in social computing: methods for studying values dimensions

Human values play an important role in shaping the design and use of information technologies. Research on values in social computing is challenged by disagreement about indicators and objects of study as researchers distribute their focus across contexts of technology design, adoption, and use. This paper draws upon a framework that clarifies how to see values in social computing research by describing values dimensions, comprised of sources and attributes of values in sociotechnical systems. This paper uses the framework to compare how diverse research methods employed in social computing surface values and make them visible to researchers. The framework provides a tool to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of each method for observing values dimensions. By detailing how and where researchers might observe interactions between values and technology design and use, we hope to enable researchers to systematically identify and investigate values in social computing.

[1]  M. Rokeach.  The Nature Of Human Values , 1974 .

[2]  Helen Nissenbaum,et al.  Grow-A-Game: A Tool for Values Conscious Design and Analysis of Digital Games , 2011, DiGRA Conference.

[3]  M. Zimmer,et al.  Values and pragmatic action: The challenges of introducing ethical intelligence in technical design communities , 2009 .

[4]  S. Schwartz.  Value orientations: Measurement, antecedents and consequences across nations. , 2007 .

[5]  W. Keith Edwards,et al.  Designs on dignity: perceptions of technology among the homeless , 2008, CHI.

[6]  David J. Saab.  An Ethnorelative Framework for Information Systems Design , 2008, AMCIS.

[7]  Neil Pollock,et al.  The business of expectations: How promissory organizations shape technology and innovation , 2010 .

[8]  M. Rokeach,et al.  The Nature Of Human Values , 1974 .

[9]  Kenneth R. Fleischmann,et al.  Developing a meta-inventory of human values , 2010, ASIST.

[10]  Helen Nissenbaum,et al.  From Preemption to Circumvention: If Technology Regulates Why Do We Need Regulation (and Vice Versa)? , 2011 .

[11]  Kenneth R. Fleischmann,et al.  Digital libraries and human values: Human-computer interaction meets social informatics , 2008, ASIST.

[12]  Geri Gay,et al.  Designing collaboration: comparing cases exploring cultural probes as boundary-negotiating objects , 2013, CSCW '13.

[13]  Katie Shilton,et al.  Values Levers , 2013 .

[14]  George A. Bekey,et al.  Robot ethics: Mapping the issues for a mechanized world , 2011, Artif. Intell..

[15]  Brenda Laurel,et al.  Design Research: Methods and Perspectives , 2003 .

[16]  Doug Schuler,et al.  Social computing , 1994, CACM.

[17]  Lucy A. Suchman,et al.  Do categories have politics? , 1993, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[18]  Susan Wyche,et al.  Values as lived experience: evolving value sensitive design in support of value discovery , 2009, CHI.

[19]  Douglas W. Oard,et al.  Investigating multi-label classification for human values , 2010, ASIST.

[20]  R. Jowell.  Measuring attitudes cross-nationally : lessons from the European social survey , 2007 .

[21]  Alan Borning,et al.  Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems , 2020, The Ethics of Information Technologies.

[22]  Marisa E. Campbell.  CHI 2004 , 2004, INTR.

[23]  Anders Albrechtslund,et al.  Ethics and technology design , 2007, Ethics and Information Technology.

[24]  Jennifer Ann Rode,et al.  (Whose) value-sensitive design: a study of long- distance relationships in an Arabic cultural context , 2011, CSCW.

[25]  James R. Eagan,et al.  Reflecting on the invisible: understanding end-user perceptions of ubiquitous computing , 2008, UbiComp.

[26]  Jes A. Koepfler,et al.  Studying the values of hard-to-reach populations: content analysis of tweets by the 21st century homeless , 2012, iConference '12.

[27]  Victor Kaptelinin,et al.  Affordances in HCI: toward a mediated action perspective , 2012, CHI.

[28]  Philip Brey,et al.  Method in computer ethics: Towards a multi-level interdisciplinary approach , 1999, Ethics and Information Technology.

[29]  Batya Friedman,et al.  Human values and the design of computer technology , 1997 .

[30]  Christopher Kelty,et al.  Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software , 2008 .

[31]  Alan Borning,et al.  Next steps for value sensitive design , 2012, CHI.

[32]  Jeroen van den Hoven,et al.  Information Technology and Moral Philosophy , 2008 .

[33]  Jes A. Koepfler,et al.  A stake in the issue of homelessness: identifying values of interest for design in online communities , 2013, C&T '13.

[34]  Ping Wang,et al.  The role of innovation and wealth in the net neutrality debate: A content analysis of human values in congressional and FCC hearings , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[35]  Helen Nissenbaum,et al.  Privacy in Context - Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life , 2009 .

[36]  Bonnie Nardi,et al.  Survival needs and social inclusion: technology use among the homeless , 2010, CSCW '10.

[37]  Jes A. Koepfler,et al.  Charting Sociotechnical Dimensions of Values for Design Research , 2013, Inf. Soc..

[38]  Batya Friedman,et al.  The envisioning cards: a toolkit for catalyzing humanistic and technical imaginations , 2012, CHI.

[39]  William A. Wallace,et al.  Value Conflicts in Computational Modeling , 2010, Computer.

[40]  Gilbert Cockton,et al.  From quality in use to value in the world , 2004, CHI EA '04.

[41]  D. MacKenzie.  An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial Models Shape Markets , 2006 .

[42]  Erik Fisher,et al.  Ethnographic Invention: Probing the Capacity of Laboratory Decisions , 2007 .

[43]  Jordan L. Boyd-Graber,et al.  Content Analysis for Values Elicitation , 2012 .

[44]  Katie Shilton,et al.  This is an Intervention: Foregrounding and Operationalizing Ethics During Technology Design , 2014 .

[45]  William A. Wallace,et al.  Ensuring transparency in computational modeling , 2009, CACM.

[46]  Morgan G. Ames,et al.  Understanding technology choices and values through social class , 2011, CSCW.

[47]  L. Suchman.  Do categories have politics? The language/action perspective reconsidered , 1993 .

[48]  Kenneth R. Fleischmann,et al.  The relationship between human values and attitudes toward the Park51 and nuclear power controversies , 2011, ASIST.

[49]  William A. Wallace,et al.  How values can reduce conflicts in the design process: Results from a multi-site mixed-method field study , 2011, ASIST.

[50]  Helen Nissenbaum,et al.  Bias in computer systems , 1996, TOIS.

[51]  Hector Postigo,et al.  Questioning the Web 2.0 Discourse: Social Roles, Production, Values, and the Case of the Human Rights Portal , 2011, Inf. Soc..

[52]  Simone van der Burg,et al.  Imagining the Future of Photoacoustic Mammography , 2009, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[53]  M. Flanagan,et al.  Embodying values in technology: Theory and practice , 2008 .

[54]  P. Verbeek,et al.  Materializing Morality , 2006 .

[55]  Diana E. Forsythe,et al.  Studying Those Who Study Us: An Anthropologist in the World of Artificial Intelligence , 2002 .

[56]  S. Schwartz.  Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries , 1992 .

[57]  K. Himma.  A dualist analysis of abortion: personhood and the concept of self qua experiential subject , 2005, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[58]  Jörn Messeter,et al.  Facilitating collaboration through design games , 2004, PDC 04.

[59]  M. Siegrist,et al.  Salient Value Similarity, Social Trust, and Risk/Benefit Perception , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[60]  Wenji Mao,et al.  Social Computing: From Social Informatics to Social Intelligence , 2007, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[61]  Dennis F. Galletta,et al.  Human-Computer Interaction and Management Information Systems – Foundations , 2006 .

[62]  Phoebe Sengers,et al.  Reflective design , 2005, Critical Computing.

[63]  Geoffrey C. Bowker,et al.  Values in design , 2011, Commun. ACM.

[64]  David H. Guston,et al.  Real-time technology assessment , 2020, Emerging Technologies: Ethics, Law and Governance.