Blended, Not Bossy: Ethics Roles, Responsibilities and Expertise in Design. Shilton, K. & Anderson, S. Interacting with Computers, 29(1):71–79, January, 2017. ![Blended, Not Bossy: Ethics Roles, Responsibilities and Expertise in Design [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex What are the best ways for design teams attend to issues of power, inequity, trust and other ethical concerns as they arise in design? Literature on value-sensitive design (VSD) and technology ethics has advocated for a range of design methods that propose different roles and responsibility for ethics during technology development. This paper explores four provocations that imagine different roles and responsibilities for moral and ethical reasoning on design teams: participatory design (in which diverse stakeholders may represent their own values in the design process), values advocates (introducing experts to lead values discussions or conduct ethics interventions), embedding values discussions within design and encouraging ‘moral exemplars’ within design. Each of these posits different logistical arrangements as well as different levels of expertise in ethical practice. The paper uses examples from the VSD and computer ethics literatures as well as the authors' ethnographic work to explore the advantages, challenges and consequences of each approach.
@article{shilton_blended_2017,
title = {Blended, {Not} {Bossy}: {Ethics} {Roles}, {Responsibilities} and {Expertise} in {Design}},
volume = {29},
issn = {0953-5438},
shorttitle = {Blended, {Not} {Bossy}},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iww002},
doi = {10.1093/iwc/iww002},
abstract = {What are the best ways for design teams attend to issues of power, inequity, trust and other ethical concerns as they arise in design? Literature on value-sensitive design (VSD) and technology ethics has advocated for a range of design methods that propose different roles and responsibility for ethics during technology development. This paper explores four provocations that imagine different roles and responsibilities for moral and ethical reasoning on design teams: participatory design (in which diverse stakeholders may represent their own values in the design process), values advocates (introducing experts to lead values discussions or conduct ethics interventions), embedding values discussions within design and encouraging ‘moral exemplars’ within design. Each of these posits different logistical arrangements as well as different levels of expertise in ethical practice. The paper uses examples from the VSD and computer ethics literatures as well as the authors' ethnographic work to explore the advantages, challenges and consequences of each approach.},
number = {1},
urldate = {2024-01-26},
journal = {Interacting with Computers},
author = {Shilton, Katie and Anderson, Sara},
month = jan,
year = {2017},
keywords = {ethics in design, gw\_abstracts, values},
pages = {71--79},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"mBtnhW8K4Trzf3xhG","bibbaseid":"shilton-anderson-blendednotbossyethicsrolesresponsibilitiesandexpertiseindesign-2017","author_short":["Shilton, K.","Anderson, S."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Blended, Not Bossy: Ethics Roles, Responsibilities and Expertise in Design","volume":"29","issn":"0953-5438","shorttitle":"Blended, Not Bossy","url":"https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iww002","doi":"10.1093/iwc/iww002","abstract":"What are the best ways for design teams attend to issues of power, inequity, trust and other ethical concerns as they arise in design? Literature on value-sensitive design (VSD) and technology ethics has advocated for a range of design methods that propose different roles and responsibility for ethics during technology development. This paper explores four provocations that imagine different roles and responsibilities for moral and ethical reasoning on design teams: participatory design (in which diverse stakeholders may represent their own values in the design process), values advocates (introducing experts to lead values discussions or conduct ethics interventions), embedding values discussions within design and encouraging ‘moral exemplars’ within design. Each of these posits different logistical arrangements as well as different levels of expertise in ethical practice. The paper uses examples from the VSD and computer ethics literatures as well as the authors' ethnographic work to explore the advantages, challenges and consequences of each approach.","number":"1","urldate":"2024-01-26","journal":"Interacting with Computers","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Shilton"],"firstnames":["Katie"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Anderson"],"firstnames":["Sara"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"January","year":"2017","keywords":"ethics in design, gw_abstracts, values","pages":"71–79","bibtex":"@article{shilton_blended_2017,\n\ttitle = {Blended, {Not} {Bossy}: {Ethics} {Roles}, {Responsibilities} and {Expertise} in {Design}},\n\tvolume = {29},\n\tissn = {0953-5438},\n\tshorttitle = {Blended, {Not} {Bossy}},\n\turl = {https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iww002},\n\tdoi = {10.1093/iwc/iww002},\n\tabstract = {What are the best ways for design teams attend to issues of power, inequity, trust and other ethical concerns as they arise in design? Literature on value-sensitive design (VSD) and technology ethics has advocated for a range of design methods that propose different roles and responsibility for ethics during technology development. This paper explores four provocations that imagine different roles and responsibilities for moral and ethical reasoning on design teams: participatory design (in which diverse stakeholders may represent their own values in the design process), values advocates (introducing experts to lead values discussions or conduct ethics interventions), embedding values discussions within design and encouraging ‘moral exemplars’ within design. Each of these posits different logistical arrangements as well as different levels of expertise in ethical practice. The paper uses examples from the VSD and computer ethics literatures as well as the authors' ethnographic work to explore the advantages, challenges and consequences of each approach.},\n\tnumber = {1},\n\turldate = {2024-01-26},\n\tjournal = {Interacting with Computers},\n\tauthor = {Shilton, Katie and Anderson, Sara},\n\tmonth = jan,\n\tyear = {2017},\n\tkeywords = {ethics in design, gw\\_abstracts, values},\n\tpages = {71--79},\n}\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Shilton, K.","Anderson, S."],"key":"shilton_blended_2017-1","id":"shilton_blended_2017-1","bibbaseid":"shilton-anderson-blendednotbossyethicsrolesresponsibilitiesandexpertiseindesign-2017","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iww002"},"keyword":["ethics in design","gw_abstracts","values"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"html":""},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero-group/dcambrid/5266609","dataSources":["df8amcRT5r387YYHM","e4qi3jRmPhPzc7C9a"],"keywords":["ethics in design","gw_abstracts","values"],"search_terms":["blended","bossy","ethics","roles","responsibilities","expertise","design","shilton","anderson"],"title":"Blended, Not Bossy: Ethics Roles, Responsibilities and Expertise in Design","year":2017}