Advertisement

Do Ethics Matter in Persuasive Technology?

  • Raymond Kight
  • Sandra Burri Gram-HansenEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11433)

Abstract

This paper aims to discuss how ethics has been addressed within the persuasive technology field and to explore whether ethics is generally applied in persuasive technology (PT) or simply recognized by academics as an important perspective. The paper is based on a literature review of the past 13 years of Persuasive Technology conference papers. The themes identified from the literature review are presented along with summaries of defining works within the field which have contributed to the discussion of ethics. This is followed by a discussion and reflection on the findings of the literature review. Finally, we conclude that ethics does matter but we argue that ethics has not been adequately addressed in the field of PT and that ethical considerations regarding the rights of the designers need to be researched.

Keywords

Persuasion Rights Ethics Freedom of speech Rhetoric 

References

  1. 1.
    Fogg, B.J.: Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atkinson, B.M.C.: Captology: a critical review. In: IJsselsteijn, W.A., de Kort, Y.A.W., Midden, C., Eggen, B., van den Hoven, E. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2006. LNCS, vol. 3962, pp. 171–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11755494_25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davis, J.: Design methods for ethical persuasive computing. In: Persuasive 2009, 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, Paper 6, New York, NY, USA. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    IJsselsteijn, W., de Kort, Y., Midden, C., Eggen, B., van den Hoven, E.: Persuasive technology for human well-being: setting the scene. In: IJsselsteijn, W.A., de Kort, Y.A.W., Midden, C., Eggen, B., van den Hoven, E. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2006. LNCS, vol. 3962, pp. 1–5. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11755494_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gasser, R., Brodbeck, D., Degen, M., Luthiger, J., Wyss, R., Reichlin, S.: Persuasiveness of a mobile lifestyle coaching application using social facilitation. In: IJsselsteijn, W.A., de Kort, Y.A.W., Midden, C., Eggen, B., van den Hoven, E. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2006. LNCS, vol. 3962, pp. 27–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11755494_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berdichevsky, D., Neuenschwander, E.: Toward an ethics of persuasive technology. Commun. ACM 42, 51–58 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khaled, R., Barr, P., Noble, J., Fischer, R., Biddle, R.: Our place or mine? Exploration into collectivism-focused persuasive technology design. In: IJsselsteijn, W.A., de Kort, Y.A.W., Midden, C., Eggen, B., van den Hoven, E. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2006. LNCS, vol. 3962, pp. 72–83. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11755494_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Laurel, B.: Meeting people where they are. In: Persuasive 2009, 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, New York, NY, USA, pp. 1–2. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Torning, K., Oinas-kukkonen, H.: Persuasive system design : state of the art and future directions. In: Persuasive 2009, 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, Cordura Hall, New York, NY, USA. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gram-hansen, S.B.: Persuasive designs for learning - learning in persuasive design: exploring the potential of persuasive designs in complex environments, p. 181. Aalborg Universitetsforlag (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karppinen, P., Oinas-Kukkonen, H.: Three approaches to ethical considerations in the design of behavior change support systems. In: Berkovsky, S., Freyne, J. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2013. LNCS, vol. 7822, pp. 87–98. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37157-8_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smids, J.: The voluntariness of persuasive technology. In: Bang, M., Ragnemalm, E.L. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7284, pp. 123–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31037-9_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yetim, F.: A set of critical heuristics for value sensitive designers and users of persuasive systems. In: ECIS 2011 Proceedings, Helsinki (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Spahn, A.: And lead us (not) into persuasion…? Persuasive technology and the ethics of communication. Sci. Eng. Ethics 18, 1–18 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gram-Hansen, S.B.: Towards an approach to ethics and HCI development based on Løgstrup’s ideas. In: Gross, T., et al. (eds.) INTERACT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5726, pp. 200–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03655-2_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kraut, R.: Aristotle’s Ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2018)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Redström, J.: Persuasive design: fringes and foundations. In: IJsselsteijn, W.A., de Kort, Y.A.W., Midden, C., Eggen, B., van den Hoven, E. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2006. LNCS, vol. 3962, pp. 112–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11755494_17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yurieff, K.: Your Facebook data scandal questions answered. CNN Business (2018)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    n/a. Facebook’s Messenger Kids app accused of violating children’s privacy law. Business Standard (2018)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Associated Press: Facebook is accused of violating election law in Seattle. The Telegraph (2018)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tynan, D.: Facebook accused of censorship after hundreds of US political pages purged. The Guardian (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communication and PsychologyAalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations