Selecting Effective Means to Any End: Futures and Ethics of Persuasion Profiling

Interactive persuasive technologies can and do adapt to individuals. Existing systems identify and adapt to user preferences within a specific domain: e.g., a music recommender system adapts its recommended songs to user preferences. This paper is concerned with adaptive persuasive systems that adapt to individual differences in the effectiveness of particular means, rather than selecting different ends. We give special attention to systems that implement persuasion profiling — adapting to individual differences in the effects of influence strategies. We argue that these systems are worth separate consideration and raise unique ethical issues for two reasons: (1) their end-independence implies that systems trained in one context can be used in other, unexpected contexts and (2) they do not rely on — and are generally disadvantaged by — disclosing that they are adapting to individual differences. We use examples of these systems to illustrate some ethically and practically challenging futures that these characteristics make possible.

[1]  Daniel Berdichevsky,et al.  Toward an ethics of persuasive technology , 1999, CACM.

[2]  John Riedl,et al.  E-Commerce Recommendation Applications , 2004, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery.

[3]  David A. Cohn,et al.  Active Learning with Statistical Models , 1996, NIPS.

[4]  B. J. Fogg The Behavior Grid: 35 ways behavior can change , 2009, Persuasive '09.

[5]  C. F. Kao,et al.  Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. , 1986 .

[6]  Milan Petkovic,et al.  Security, Privacy, and Trust in Modern Data Management , 2007, Data-Centric Systems and Applications.

[7]  Dean Eckles,et al.  Mobile Persuasion: 20 Perspectives on the Future of Behavior Change , 2007 .

[8]  R. Cialdini Influence: Science and Practice , 1984 .

[9]  Paul R. Prabhaker,et al.  Who owns the online consumer , 2000 .

[10]  Privender Saini,et al.  Understanding user cognitions to guide the tailoring of persuasive technology-based physical activity interventions , 2009, Persuasive '09.

[11]  Boris E. R. de Ruyter,et al.  Persuasion in ambient intelligence , 2010, J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput..

[12]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do , 2002, UBIQ.

[13]  Boris E. R. de Ruyter,et al.  The Persuasiveness of Ambient Intelligence , 2007, Security, Privacy, and Trust in Modern Data Management.

[14]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. , 1999 .

[15]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Dual-process theories in social psychology , 1999 .