Supporting and Understanding Reflection on Persuasive Technology Through a Reflection Schema

Abstract

Literature on persuasive technology acknowledges the importance of promoting reflection within design research and practice. This paper takes up a reflection framework suggested in previous research as assisting the reasoning of researchers, designers or other stakeholders concerning values, goals, actions, and their consequences in a project. It contributes to this research by demonstrating additional evidence for the applicability of the reflection framework by applying it to a published case. This work can guide researchers and practitioners by means of issues to be considered while reflecting on as well as communicating value-related aspects in a project, so that significant value choices and the rationale for actions taken to promote them are clear.

From What to How: An Initial Review of Publicly Available AI Ethics Tools, Methods and Research to Translate Principles into Practices

“…This is a rationalisation process that involves a fair consideration of the practical, the good and the just, and normally relies heavily on language (discussion), for both the emergence of agreed upon norms or standards, and their reproduction. In the present scenario of developers rationalising ML design decisions to ensure that they are ethically-optimised, the tools and methods in the typology replace the role of language and act as the medium for identifying, checking, creating and re-examining ideas and giving fair consideration to differing interests, values and norms (Heath 2014 ; Yetim 2019 ). For example, the data nutrition tool (Holland et al 2018 ) provides a means of prompting a discussion and re-evaluation of the ethical implications of using a specific dataset for an ML development project, and the audit methodologies of (Diakopoulos 2015 ) ensure that external voices, who may have an opposing view as to whether or not an ML-system in use is ethically-aligned, have a mechanism for questioning the rational of design decisions and requesting their change if necessary.…”

From What to How: An Initial Review of Publicly Available AI Ethics Tools, Methods and Research to Translate Principles into Practices

“…This is a rationalisation process that involves a fair consideration of the practical, the good and the just, and normally relies heavily on language (discussion), for both the emergence of agreed upon norms or standards, and their reproduction. In the present scenario of developers rationalising ML design decisions to ensure that they are ethically-optimised, the tools and methods in the typology replace the role of language and act as the medium for identifying, checking, creating and re-examining ideas and giving fair consideration to differing interests, values and norms (Heath 2014;Yetim 2019). For example, the data nutrition tool (Holland et al 2018) provides a means of prompting a discussion and re-evaluation of the ethical implications of using a specific dataset for an ML development project, and the audit methodologies of (Diakopoulos 2015) ensure that external voices, who may have an opposing view as to whether or not an ML-system 1 3…”

Perspektif Integrasi Ilmu Terhadap Isu Menentukan Awal Waktu Solat Subuh

“…Kajian Yetim 22 dan Gardner 23 menunjukkan betapa pentingnya suatu kerangka teori dan konsep distruktur secara sistematik dalam reka bentuk penyelidikan bagi membolehkan fungsi refleksi diketengahkan. Fungsi refleksi membantu para pengkaji menyemak secara berpandu aspek kekurangan dan kelebihan penyelidikan yang dilaksanakan dari peringkat awal hingga akhir kajian.…”