ESDiT Publications

@article{nokey,

title = {Which Democratic Way to Go? Using Democracy Theories in Social Media Design},

author = {Roxanne van der Puil and Andreas Spahn and Lambèr Royakkers},

url = {https://www.esdit.nl/which-democratic-way-to-go__-using-democracy-theories-in-social-media-design/},

doi = {10.4018/IJT.331800},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-01-31},

urldate = {2023-01-31},

journal = {International Journal of Technoethics},

volume = {14},

issue = {1},

pages = {20},

abstract = {There are concerns amongst researchers and the general public that social media platforms threaten democratic values. Social media corporations and their engineers have responded to these concerns with various design solutions. Though the objective of designing social media democratically sounds straightforward, the concrete reality is not. The authors discuss what a democratic design for social media platforms could look like by exploring two classical conceptions of democracy, one in the liberal tradition and the other in the deliberative tradition. In particular, they discuss three concerns: 1) mis- and disinformation; 2) hate speech; and 3) the relations between filter bubbles, echo chambers, and public debate. By describing the underlying ideals of the two traditions and translating these into design guidelines, the authors make explicit how varied and contrary the implications of different conceptions of democracy can be for addressing public concerns and designing for democratic social media. With these things in mind, this article responds to a call, which is to raise awareness among social media corporations, engineers, and policymakers about varying democratic ideals and the implications that these may have for social media.},

keywords = {Autonomy, Democracy, Equality},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Klenk2022,

title = {(Online) manipulation: sometimes hidden, always careless},

author = {Michael Klenk},

doi = {10.1080/00346764.2021.1894350},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-01-01},

urldate = {2022-01-01},

journal = {Review of Social Economy},

volume = {80},

pages = {85-105},

keywords = {Autonomy, Digital Ethics, Manipulation, Social expectations, Social Influence},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Eiben2021,

title = {Robot Evolution: Ethical Concerns},

author = {Ágoston E. Eiben and Jacintha Eller and Gerben Meynen and Sven Nyholm},

doi = {10.3389/frobt.2021.744590},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-11-01},

journal = {Frontiers in Robotics and AI},

volume = {8},

pages = {1-9},

keywords = {Autonomy, Ethical concerns, Robotics},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Danaher2021,

title = {Automation, work and the achievement gap},

author = {John Danaher and Sven Nyholm},

doi = {10.1007/s43681-020-00028-x},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-08-01},

journal = {AI and Ethics},

volume = {1},

issue = {3},

pages = {227-237},

keywords = {Achievement, Artificial intelligence, Automation, Autonomy, Community, Mastery, Meaningful work, Responsibility gap},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{nokey,

title = {Digital Objects, Digital Subjects and Digital Societies. Deontology in the Age of Digitalization},

author = {Andreas Spahn},

doi = {10.3390/info11040228 },

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-04-20},

journal = {Information},

volume = {11},

number = {228},

issue = {4},

keywords = {Autonomy, Behaviour-change technologies, Deliberation, Deontology, Digitalisation, Ethics of digital technologies},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{nokey,

title = {The New Digital Wave of Rationalization: A Loss of Autonomy},

author = {Lambèr Royakkers and Rinie van Est},

doi = {10.4018/IJT.2020010105},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-01-01},

journal = {Technoethics},

volume = {11},

number = {5},

issue = {1},

keywords = {Autonomy, Digitalisation, Rationalisation},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}