While scholars involved in studying the ethics and politics flowing from digital information and communication systems have sought to impact the design and deployment of digital technologies, the fast pace and iterative tempo of technical development in these contexts, and the lack of structured engagement with sociotechnical questions, have been major barriers to ensuring values are considered explicitly in the R&D process. Here I introduce Apologos, a lightweight design methodology informed by the author’s experience of the challenges and opportunities of interdisciplinary collaboration between computational and social sciences over a five-year period. Apologos, which is inspired by “design apologetics”, is intended as an initial mechanism to introduce technologists to the process of considering how human values impact the digital design process.
B. Friedman and H. Nissenbaum, Bias in computer systems, ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 330–347, 1996.
B. Pfaffenberger, “If I want it, it’s OK”: Usenet and the (outer) limits of free speech, The Information Society, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 365–386, 1996.
L. Suchman, J. Blomberg, J. E. Orr, and R. Trigg, Reconstructing technologies as social practice, American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 392–408, 1999.
B. Friedman, P. H. Kahn Jr., J. Hagman, R. L. Severson, and B. Gill, The watcher and the watched: Social judgments about privacy in a public place, Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 235–272, 2006.
K. Shilton, Engaging values despite neutrality, Science,Technology,&Human Values, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 247–269, 2018.
J. Gaboury, Becoming NULL: Queer relations in the excluded middle, Women&Performance:A Journal of Feminist Theory, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 143–158, 2018.
R. Benjamin, Assessing risk, automating racism, Science, vol. 366, no. 6464, pp. 421–422, 2019.
S. Barocas and A. D. Selbst, Big data’s disparate impact, California Law Review, vol. 104, pp. 671–732, 2016.
A. Rességuier and R. Rodrigues, AI ethics should not remain toothless! A call to bring back the teeth of ethics, Big Data&Society, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 205395172094254, 2020.
S. Mohamed, M. -T. Png, and W. Isaac, Decolonial AI: Decolonial theory as sociotechnical foresight in artificial intelligence, Philosophy&Technology, vol. 33, pp. 659–684, 2020.
N. Manders-Huits and M. Zimmer, Values and pragmatic action: The challenges of introducing ethical intelligence in technical design communities, International Review of Information Ethics, pp. 1–8, 2009.
I. Poel, An ethical framework for evaluating experimental technology, Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 667–686, 2015.
I. van de Poel, J. N. Fahlquist, N. Doorn, S. Zwart, and L. Royakkers, The problem of many hands: Climate change as an example, Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 49–67, 2011.
E. Donahoe and M. M. Metzger, Artificial intelligence and human rights, Journal of Democracy, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 115–126, 2019.
B. Friedman, D. G. Hendry, and A. Borning, A survey of value sensitive design methods, Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 63–125, 2017.
K. Shilton, Values and ethics in human-computer interaction, Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 107–171, 2018.
N. JafariNaimi, L. Nathan, and I. Hargraves, Values as hypotheses: Design, inquiry, and the service of values, Design Issues, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 91–104, 2015.
C. A. L. Dantec and C. DiSalvo, Infrastructuring and the formation of publics in participatory design, Social Studies of Science, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 241–264, 2013.
K. M. MacQueen, N. T. Eley, M. Frick, L. R. Mingote, A. Chou, S. S. Seidel, S. Hannah, and C. Hamilton, Developing a framework for evaluating ethical outcomes of good participatory practices in TB clinical drug trials, Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 203–213, 2016.
K. Shilton, Values levers: Building ethics into design, Science,Technology,&Human Values, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 374–397, 2013.
D. D. Clark, The contingent internet, Daedalus, vol. 145, no. 1, pp. 9–17, 2016.
D. D. Clark, The design philosophy of the DARPA Internet Protocols, ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 102–111, 1995.
D. D. Clark, J. Wroclawski, K. R. Sollins, and R. Braden, Tussle in cyberspace: Defining tomorrow’s Internet, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 462–475, 2005.
S. Braman, The interpenetration of technical and legal decision-making for the internet, Information,Communication&Society, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 309–324, 2010.
E. Fisher, M. O’Rourke, R. Evans, E. B. Kennedy, M. E. Gorman, and T. P. Seager, Mapping the integrative field: Taking stock of socio-technical collaborations, Journal of Responsible Innovation, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 39–61, 2015.
A. S. Balmer, J. Calvert, C. Marris, S. Molyneux-Hodgson, E. Frow, M. Kearnes, K. Bulpin, P. Schyfter, A. Mackenzie, and P. Martin, Taking roles in interdisciplinary collaborations: Reflections on working in Post-ELSI spaces in the UK synthetic biology community, Science and Technology Studies, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 3–25, 2015.
A. Quan-Haase, J. L. Suarez, and D. M. Brown, Collaborating, connecting, and clustering in the humanities, American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 565–581, 2015.
D. Fitzgerald and F. Callard, Social science and neuroscience beyond interdisciplinarity: Experimental entanglements, Theory,Culture&Society, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 3–32, 2015.
F. Callard, D. Fitzgerald, and A. Woords, Interdisciplinary collaboration in action: Tracking the signal, tracing the noise, Palgrave Communications, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 15019, 2015.
G. Cockton, From doing to being: Bringing emotion into interaction, Interacting with Computers, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 89–92, 2002.
The articles published in this open access journal are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Reprints and Permission requests may be sought directly from editorial office.