[1]GU Tianlong,MA Lu,LI Long,et al.Value sensitive design of ethical-aligned AI applications: current situation and prospect[J].CAAI Transactions on Intelligent Systems,2022,17(1):2-15.[doi:10.11992/tis.202105002]
Copy

Value sensitive design of ethical-aligned AI applications: current situation and prospect

CAAI Transactions on Intelligent Systems[ISSN 1673-4785/CN 23-1538/TP] Volume: 17 Number of periods: 2022 1 Page number: 2-15 Column: 综述 Public date: 2022-01-05
Title:
Value sensitive design of ethical-aligned AI applications: current situation and prospect
Author(s):
GU Tianlong1; 2;  MA Lu1;  LI Long1; 2;  YAN Ru1
1. Guangxi Key Laboratory of Trusted Software, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin 541004, China;
2. College of Information Science and Technology/ College of Cyber Security, Ji’nan University, Guangzhou 510632, China
Keywords:
artificial intelligence; artificial intelligence application; ethical-aligned design; value sensitive design; human value; design method; stakeholders; tripartite methodology
CLC:
TP18
DOI:
10.11992/tis.202105002
Abstract:
Value sensitive design, as a high-efficiency way to embed ethics into artificial intelligence design, provides a means to avoid ethical problems and moral hazards for the application of artificial intelligence by using its unique tripartite methodology, having broad application prospects. In this paper, the connotation, principle, and method of value sensitive design are introduced systematically. Then the research of value sensitive design at home and abroad is described in detail, and comparative analysis of its typical research components is carried out. And further, this paper summarizes the achievements of value sensitive design in artificial intelligence fields in recent years, such as intelligent robots and intelligent vehicles, and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the existing studies, and finally, gives discussion and analysis on the current problems as well as challenges and the future research directions.
References:
[1] KUKLA C D, BINDER T, PORTER W L, et al. Innovation in design: strategies for designing together[C]//CHI’99 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, 1999: 108?109.
[2] ABRAS C, MALONEY-KRICHMAR D, PREECE J. User-centered design[M].BAINBRIDGE W. Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2004: 445?456.
[3] IWARSSON S, ST?HL A. Accessibility, usability and universal design-positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships[J]. Disability and rehabilitation, 2003, 25(2): 57?66.
[4] LAGE M J, PLATT G J, TREGLIA M. Inverting the classroom: a gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment[J]. The journal of economic education, 2000, 31(1): 30?43.
[5] FRIEDMAN B, KAHN JR P H, BORNING A. Value sensitive design and information systems[M].HIMMA K E, TAVANI H T. The Hand-Book of Information and Computer Ethics. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2008: 69?101.
[6] MANDERS-HUITS N. What values in design? The challenge of incorporating moral values into design[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2011, 17(2): 271?287.
[7] BORNING A, MULLER M. Next steps for value sensitive design[C]//Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Austin, USA, 2012: 1125?1134.
[8] DAVIS J, NATHAN L P. Value sensitive design: applications, adaptations, and critiques[M].VAN DEN HOVEN J, VERMAAS P E, VAN DE POEL I. Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design: Sources, Theory, Values and Application Domains. Dordrecht: Springer, 2015: 11?40.
[9] XU Heng, CROSSLER R E, BéLANGER F. A value sensitive design investigation of privacy enhancing tools in web browsers[J]. Decision support systems, 2012, 54(1):424?433.
[10] WINKLER T, SPIEKERMANN S. Twenty years of value sensitive design: a review of methodological practices in VSD projects[J]. Ethics and information technology, 2021, 23(1): 17?21.
[11] YETIM F. Bringing discourse ethics to value sensitive design: pathways toward a deliberative future[J]. AIS transactions on human-computer interaction, 2011, 3(2): 133?155.
[12] JACOBS N, HULDTGREN A. Why value sensitive design needs ethical commitments[J]. Ethics and information technology, 2021, 23(1): 23?26.
[13] JACOBS N. Capability sensitive design for health and wellbeing technologies[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2020, 26(6): 3363?3391.
[14] UMBRELLO S. Imaginative value sensitive design: using moral imagination theory to inform responsible technology design[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2020, 26(2): 575?595.
[15] VAN DE POEL I. Translating values into design requirements[M].MICHELFELDER D P, MCCARTHY N, GOLDBERG D E. Philosophy and Engineering: Reflections on Practice, Principles and Process. Dordrecht: Springer, 2013: 253?266.
[16] AIZENBERG E, VAN DEN HOVEN J. Designing for human rights in AI[J]. Big data & society, 2020, 7(2): 2053951720949566.
[17] DE REUVER M, VAN WYNSBERGHE A, JANSSEN M, et al. Digital platforms and responsible innovation: expanding value sensitive design to overcome ontological uncertainty[J]. Ethics and information technology, 2020, 22(3): 257?267.
[18] GRüNLOH C. Using technological frames as an analytic tool in value sensitive design[J]. Ethics and information technology, 2021, 23(1): 53?57.
[19] undefinedKHEIRANDISH S, FUNK M, WENSVEEN S, et al. A comprehensive value framework for design[J]. Technology in society, 2020, 62: 101302.
[20] FRIEDMAN B, HENDRY D G, BORNING A. A survey of value sensitive design methods[J]. Foundations and trends? in human-computer interaction, 2017, 11(2): 63?125.
[21] DE GREEF T, MOHABIR A, VAN DER POEL I, et al. sCEthics: embedding ethical values in cognitive engineering[C]//Proceedings of the 31st European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics. Toulouse, France, 2013: 4.
[22] VAN DE POEL I. Design for value change[J]. Ethics and information technology, 2021, 23(1): 27?31.
[23] VAN DE KAA G, REZAEI J, TAEBI B, et al. How to weigh values in value sensitive design: a best worst method approach for the case of smart metering[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2020, 26(1): 475?494.
[24] CENCI A, CAWTHORNE D. Refining value sensitive design: a (capability-based) procedural ethics approach to technological design for well-being[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2020, 26(5): 2629?2662.
[25] POMMERANZ A, DETWEILER C, WIGGERS P, et al. Elicitation of situated values: need for tools to help stakeholders and designers to reflect and communicate[J]. Ethics and information technology, 2012, 14(4): 285?303.
[26] YOO D. Stakeholder Tokens: a constructive method for value sensitive design stakeholder analysis[J]. Ethics and information technology, 2021, 23(1): 63?67.
[27] LOGLER N, YOO D, FRIEDMAN B. Metaphor cards: a how-to-guide for making and using a generative metaphorical design toolkit[C]//Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference. Hong Kong, China, 2018: 1373?1386.
[28] ALSHEHRI T, KIRKHAM R, OLIVIER P. Scenario co-creation cards: a culturally sensitive tool for eliciting values[C]//Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Honolulu, USA, 2020: 1?14.
[29] KHEIRANDISH S, FUNK M, WENSVEEN S, et al. HuValue: a tool to support design students in considering human values in their design[J]. International journal of technology and design education, 2020, 30(5): 1015?1041.
[30] 刘瑞琳, 陈凡. 技术设计的创新方法与伦理考量——弗里德曼的价值敏感设计方法论述评[J]. 东北大学学报(社会科学版), 2014(3): 232?237.
LIU Ruilin, CHEN Fan. Innovative approaches and ethical considerations of technological design ? a review on B. friedman’s value sensitive design[J]. Ournal of Northeastern University (social science edition), 2014(3): 232-237.
[31] 刘宝杰. 价值敏感设计方法探析[J]. 自然辩证法通讯, 2015(2): 94?98.
LIU Baojie. Method of value sensitive design[J]. Journal of dialectics of nature, 2015(2): 94?98.
[32] 郭延龙, 汤书昆. 价值与责任: 智能人工物设计中技术治理问题探析[J]. 自然辩证法研究, 2020(5): 61?66.
GUO Yanlong, TANG Shukun. On the value and responsibility: analysis of technology governance in intelligent artifact design[J]. Studies in dialectics of nature, 2020(5): 61?66.
[33] 杜严勇. 机器人伦理设计进路及其评价[J]. 哲学动态, 2017(9): 84?91.
DU Yanyong. Robot ethical design approach and its evaluation[J]. Philosophical trends, 2017(9): 84-91.
[34] 闫坤如. 技术哲学的价值论转向透视[J]. 学术研究, 2019(3): 12?17.
YAN Rukun. The axiology of philosophy of technology turns to perspective[J]. Academic research, 2019(3): 12?17.
[35] 孙福海, 陈思宇, 黄甫全, 等. 道德人工智能: 基础、原则与设计[J]. 湖南师范大学教育科学学报, 2021(1): 38?46.
SUN Fuhai, CHEN Siyu, HUANG Puquan, et al. Moral artificial intelligence: foundations, principles and design[J]. Journal of Educational Science of Hunan Normal University, 2021(1): 38-46.
[36] 张贵红. 价值敏感设计与大数据伦理[J]. 伦理学研究, 2019(2): 114?119.
ZHANG Guihong. Value sensitive design and big data ethics[J]. Studies in ethics, 2019(2): 114?119.
[37] 尹文娟. 工程活动中的“利益相关者”: 必要性、缺席与复位研究[J]. 科学技术哲学研究, 2019(5): 68?73.
YIN Wenjuan. An analysis of "stakeholders" in engineering activities: its necessity, absence and back to the context[J]. Studies in philosophy of science and technology, 2019(5): 68?73.
[38] 刘培, 池忠军. 算法的伦理问题及其解决进路[J]. 东北大学学报(社会科学版), 2019, 21(2): 118?125.
LIU Pei, CHI Zhongjun. Ethical issues of algorithms and their solutions[J]. Journal of Northeastern University (social science edition), 2019, 21(2): 118-125.
[39] 李飞翔. “大数据杀熟”背后的伦理审思, 治理与启示[J]. 东北大学学报(社会科学版), 2020, 22(1): 7?15.
LI Feixiang. Ethical reflections, governance and implications under the background of big data price discrimination[J]. Journal of Northeastern University (social science edition), 2020, 22(1): 7?15.
[40] 朴毅, 叶斌, 徐飞. 从算法分析看人工智能的价值非中立性及其应对[J]. 科技管理研究, 2020, 40(24): 245?251.
PU Yi, YE Bin, XU Fei. The value non-neutrality of artificial intelligence and countermeasure from the perspective of algorithm analysis[J]. Science and technology management research, 2020, 40(24): 245?251.
[41] 陈炜, 刘郦. 劝导技术道德化实践探索[J]. 自然辩证法研究, 2020(1): 44?49.
CHEN Wei, LIU Li. Practical exploration of the moralization of persuasion technology[J]. Studies in dialectics of nature, 2020(1): 44-49.
[42] HOWARD A, BORENSTEIN J. The ugly truth about ourselves and our robot creations: the problem of bias and social inequity[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2018, 24(5): 1521?1536.
[43] RANTANEN T, LEHTO P, VUORINEN P, et al. The adoption of care robots in home care ? a survey on the attitudes of Finnish home care personnel[J]. Journal of clinical nursing, 2018, 27(9/10): 1846?1859.
[44] BORGES J V. Robots and the military: a strategic view[M].FERREIRA M I A, SEQUEIRA J S, TOKHI M O, et al. A World with Robots: International Conference on Robot Ethics: ICRE 2015. Cham: Springer, 2017: 199?205.
[45] CHEON E, SU N M. Integrating roboticist values into a Value Sensitive Design framework for humanoid robots[C]//11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. Christchurch, New Zealand, 2016: 375?382.
[46] VAN WYNSBERGHE A. Designing robots for care: care centered value-sensitive design[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2013, 19(2): 407?433.
[47] VAN WYNSBERGHE A. Service robots, care ethics, and design[J]. Ethics and information technology, 2016, 18(4): 311?321.
[48] DE SIO F S, VAN WYNSBERGHE A. When should we use care robots? The nature-of-activities approach[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2016, 22(6): 1745?1760.
[49] POULSEN A, BURMEISTER O K, TIEN D. A new design approach and framework for elderly care robots[C]//Australasian Conference on Information Systems. Sydney, Australia, 2018: 1?12.
[50] POULSEN A, BURMEISTER O K, KREPS D. The ethics of inherent trust in care robots for the elderly[C]//13th IFIP TC 9 International Conference on Human Choice and Computers. Poznan, Poland, 2018: 314?328.
[51] POULSEN A, BURMEISTER O K. Overcoming carer shortages with care robots: dynamic value trade-offs in run-time[J]. Australasian journal of information systems, 2019, 23: 1?18.
[52] LIN Chao, HE Debiao, KUMAR N, et al. Security and privacy for the internet of drones: challenges and solutions[J]. IEEE communications magazine, 2018, 56(1): 64?69.
[53] NI Jianbing, LIN Xiaodong, SHEN Xuemin. Toward privacy-preserving valet parking in autonomous driving era[J]. IEEE transactions on vehicular technology, 2019, 68(3): 2893?2905.
[54] FAGNANT D J, KOCKELMAN K. Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations[J]. Transportation research part A: policy and practice, 2015, 77: 167?181.
[55] DING Guoru, WU Qihui, ZHANG Linyuan, et al. An amateur drone surveillance system based on the cognitive internet of things[J]. IEEE communications magazine, 2018, 56(1): 29?35.
[56] FLIPSE S M, PUYLAERT S. Organizing a collaborative development of technological design requirements using a constructive dialogue on value profiles: a case in automated vehicle development[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2018, 24(1): 49?72.
[57] THORNTON S M, LEWIS F E, ZHANG V, et al. Value sensitive design for autonomous vehicle motion planning[C]//2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV). Changshu, China, 2018: 1157?1162.
[58] CAWTHORNE D, CENCI A. Value sensitive design of a humanitarian cargo drone[C]//2019 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems . Atlanta, USA, 2019: 1117?1125.
[59] CAWTHORNE D, ROBBINS-VAN WYNSBERGHE A. An ethical framework for the design, development, implementation, and assessment of drones used in public healthcare[J]. Science and engineering ethics, 2020, 26(5): 2867?2891.
[60] CAWTHORNE D, ROBBINS-VAN WYNSBERGHE A. From healthDrone to frugalDrone: value-sensitive design of a blood sample transportation drone[C]//2019 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS). Medford, USA, 2019: 1?7.
[61] DENG Xuefei, CHRISTODOULIDOU N. Understanding user values of wearable computing[C]//Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Information Systems. Fort Worth, USA, 2015: 1?10.
[62] CHEN Bodong, ZHU Haiyi. Towards value-sensitive learning analytics design[C]//Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge. Tempe, USA, 2019: 343?352.
[63] BRIGGS P, THOMAS L. An inclusive, value sensitive design perspective on future identity technologies[J]. ACM transactions on computer-human interaction, 2015, 22(5): 1?28.
[64] BASTIAN M, HELBERGER N, MAKHORTYKH M. Safeguarding the journalistic DNA: attitudes towards the role of professional values in algorithmic news recommender designs[J]. Digital journalism, 2021, 9(6): 835?863.
[65] HELBING D, FANITABASI F, GIANNOTTI F, et al. Ethics of smart cities: towards value-sensitive design and co-evolving city life[J]. Sustainability, 2021, 13(20): 1?25.
[66] STONE T. Design for values and the city[J]. Journal of responsible innovation, 2021: 364–381.
Similar References:

Memo

-

Last Update: 1900-01-01

Copyright © CAAI Transactions on Intelligent Systems