Towards a closer dialogue between policy and practice: responsible design in HCI

Given the potent and pervasive nature of modern technologies, this paper lays out the complexities involved in achieving responsible design. In order to do this we will first compare an emerging policy-oriented programme of research known as RRI (Responsible Research and Innovation) with initiatives in HCI. A focus on the similarities and differences may highlight to what extent responsibility is already and successfully embedded within the concerns and practices of design and use, and what may yet need to be incorporated for responsible design. The paper then discusses the challenges of 'naturalising' the very ambitious programme of RRI within specific design activities and concerns, through the lens of four analytic concepts: reflexivity; responsiveness; inclusion; and anticipation. Finally, we make a case for a pragmatic, 'unromantic', but engaged reinterpretation of RRI for HCI.

[1]  Stuart Reeves,et al.  Envisioning ubiquitous computing , 2012, CHI.

[2]  Bernd Carsten Stahl,et al.  Responsible research and innovation: Critical reflection into the potential social consequences of ICT , 2013, IEEE 7th International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS).

[3]  Fahri Yetim,et al.  Bringing Discourse Ethics to Value Sensitive Design: Pathways toward a Deliberative Future , 2011 .

[4]  Vicki L. Hanson Influencing technology adoption by older adults , 2010, Interact. Comput..

[5]  R. V. Schomberg A Vision of Responsible Research and Innovation , 2013 .

[6]  Simon Bowen Critical Theory and Participatory Design , 2010 .

[7]  A Trans-Atlantic Conversation on Responsible Innovation and Responsible Governance , 2012 .

[8]  Sarah Barbrow,et al.  Infrastructure and vocation: field, calling and computation in ecology , 2013, CHI.

[9]  B. Latour We Have Never Been Modern , 1991 .

[10]  T. Franqueira Reshaping urban lives: design as social intervention towards community networks , 2007 .

[11]  M. Lynch Against Reflexivity as an Academic Virtue and Source of Privileged Knowledge , 2000 .

[12]  M. Gorman,et al.  A framework for responsible innovation , 2013 .

[13]  Trisha Greenhalgh,et al.  What matters to older people with assisted living needs? A phenomenological analysis of the use and non-use of telehealth and telecare. , 2013, Social science & medicine.

[14]  Johan Redström,et al.  Slow Technology – Designing for Reflection , 2001, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[15]  Wendy Moncur,et al.  The emotional wellbeing of researchers: considerations for practice , 2013, CHI.

[16]  Jonathan Bean,et al.  The weapons factory in the den , 2013, Interactions.

[17]  A. Sheikh,et al.  Piloting tele-monitoring in COPD: a mixed methods exploration of issues in design and implementation. , 2011, Primary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group.

[18]  D. Haraway Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective , 1988 .

[19]  Singer Nicolas,et al.  Collecting and Classifying Large Scale Data to Build an Adaptive and Collective Memory: a Case Study in e-Health for a Pro-active Management , 2011 .

[20]  Batya Friedman,et al.  Value-sensitive design , 1996, INTR.

[21]  Robert Caverly,et al.  Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society , 2013 .

[22]  Javier Lezaun,et al.  Consulting citizens: technologies of elicitation and the mobility of publics , 2007 .

[23]  Nicole A. Vincent A Structured Taxonomy of Responsibility Concepts , 2010 .

[24]  M. Holmes Emotional Reflexivity in Contemporary Friendships: Understanding it Using Elias and Facebook Etiquette , 2011 .

[25]  Rémi Bastide,et al.  A sustainable software architecture for home care monitoring applications , 2012, 2012 6th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (DEST).

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

[27]  Latanya Sweeney,et al.  Discrimination in online ad delivery , 2013, CACM.

[28]  Andrea Botero Expanding design space(s) : design in communal endeavours , 2013 .

[29]  M. Korstanje The Risk Society: Towards a new modernity , 2009 .

[30]  J. Gregory Scandinavian Approaches to Participatory Design , 2003 .

[31]  Nancy Tuana,et al.  The Role of the National Science Foundation Broader Impacts Criterion in Enhancing Research Ethics Pedagogy , 2009 .

[32]  Robin Williams,et al.  Who Decides the Shape of Product Markets? The Knowledge Institutions Who Name and Categorize New Technologies , 2011, Inf. Organ..

[33]  J. Stilgoe,et al.  Developing a framework for responsible innovation* , 2013, The Ethics of Nanotechnology, Geoengineering and Clean Energy.

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

[35]  Luigi Pellizzoni,et al.  Responsibility and Environmental Governance , 2004 .

[36]  R. Perkins,et al.  Recovery and person-centred care in dementia: common purpose, common practice? , 2010 .

[37]  S. Marshall,et al.  An ethical framework for automated, wearable cameras in health behavior research. , 2013, American journal of preventive medicine.

[38]  Sampsa Hyysalo Health Technology Development and Use: From Practice-Bound Imagination to Evolving Impacts , 2010 .

[39]  Alfred Kobsa,et al.  The Circles of Latitude: Adoption and Usage of Location Tracking in Online Social Networking , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering.

[40]  Albrecht Schmidt,et al.  The drift table: designing for ludic engagement , 2004, CHI EA '04.

[41]  Hajar Mozaffar,et al.  Health Technology Development and Use: From Practice‐bound Imagination to Evolving Impacts , 2011 .

[42]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Reflecting human values in the digital age , 2009, CACM.

[43]  M. Six Silberman,et al.  When the implication is not to design (technology) , 2011, CHI.

[44]  Dave W. Randall,et al.  The past is a different place: they do things differently there , 2008, DIS '08.