Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Ethics Pathways: A Design Activity for Reflecting on Ethics Engagement in HCI Research (2405.16654v1)

Published 26 May 2024 in cs.CY and cs.HC

Abstract: This paper introduces Ethics Pathways, a design activity aimed at understanding HCI and design researchers' ethics engagements and flows during their research process. Despite a strong ethical commitment in these fields, challenges persist in grasping the complexity of researchers' engagement with ethics -- practices conducted to operationalize ethics -- in situated institutional contexts. Ethics Pathways, developed through six playtesting sessions, offers a design approach to understanding the complexities of researchers' past ethics engagements in their work. This activity involves four main tasks: recalling ethical incidents; describing stakeholders involved in the situation; recounting their actions or speculative alternatives; and reflection and emotion walk-through. The paper reflects on the role of design decisions and facilitation strategies in achieving these goals. The design activity contributes to the discourse on ethical HCI research by conceptualizing ethics engagement as a part of ongoing research processing, highlighting connections between individual affective experiences, social interactions across power differences, and institutional goals.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (87)
  1. Ethics and system Design in a new era of human-computer interaction [guest editorial]. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 38, 4 (2019), 32–33.
  2. Design science research modes in human-computer interaction projects. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction 13, 1 (2021), 1–11.
  3. Sanju Ahuja and Jyoti Kumar. 2021. How Ethical Are Persuasive Design Practices? A Proposal for Assessment of Ethics in HCI Design. In Design for Tomorrow—Volume 1: Proceedings of ICoRD 2021. Springer, 475–488.
  4. Walking the Walk of AI Ethics: Organizational Challenges and the Individualization of Risk among Ethics Entrepreneurs. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (Chicago, IL, USA) (FAccT ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1145/3593013.3593990
  5. Kristina Andersen and Ron Wakkary. 2019. The Magic Machine Workshops: Making Personal Design Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300342
  6. Applying cases to solve ethical problems: The significance of positive and process-oriented reflection. Ethics & Behavior 22, 2 (2012), 113–130.
  7. Judgment Call the Game: Using Value Sensitive Design and Design Fiction to Surface Ethical Concerns Related to Technology. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference (San Diego, CA, USA) (DIS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 421–433. https://doi.org/10.1145/3322276.3323697
  8. CHI 2039: speculative research visions. In CHI ’14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) (CHI EA ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 761–770. https://doi.org/10.1145/2559206.2578864
  9. Research Ethics Town Hall Meeting. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work (Sanibel Island, Florida, USA) (GROUP ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 393–396. https://doi.org/10.1145/3148330.3154523
  10. Mark Blythe. 2014. Research through design fiction: narrative in real and imaginary abstracts. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) (CHI ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 703–712. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557098
  11. Karen L Boyd and Katie Shilton. 2021. Adapting ethical sensitivity as a construct to study technology design teams. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, GROUP (2021), 1–29.
  12. Five Provocations for Ethical HCI Research. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 852–863. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858313
  13. Sai Shruthi Chivukula. 2021. Designing for Co-Creation to Engage Multiple Perspectives on Ethics in Technology Practice. (7 2021). https://doi.org/10.25394/PGS.15036321.v1
  14. Surveying the Landscape of Ethics-Focused Design Methods. arXiv:2102.08909 [cs.HC]
  15. Wrangling Ethical Design Complexity: Dilemmas, Tensions, and Situations. In Companion Publication of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (Pittsburgh, PA, USA) (DIS ’23 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1145/3563703.3596632
  16. Dimensions of UX Practice that Shape Ethical Awareness. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376459
  17. Cohn Jackman, Molly. 2016. Research review at Facebook. https://research.facebook.com/blog/2016/6/research-review-at-facebook/
  18. Joshua D Crigger. 2021. An exploration of embodiment, narrative identity, and healing in Dungeons and Dragons. (2021).
  19. Investigating Practices and Opportunities for Cross-functional Collaboration around AI Fairness in Industry Practice. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (Chicago, IL, USA) (FAccT ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 705–716. https://doi.org/10.1145/3593013.3594037
  20. Research Ethics Roundtable. In Companion Publication of the 2020 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (Virtual Event, USA) (CSCW ’20 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 195–198. https://doi.org/10.1145/3406865.3419015
  21. Taleb Durgahee. 1997. Reflective practice: nursing ethics through story telling. Nursing ethics 4, 2 (1997), 135–146.
  22. Anja Endmann and Daniela Keßner. 2016. User journey mapping–A method in user experience design. i-com 15, 1 (2016), 105–110.
  23. Casey Fiesler. 2019. Ethical Considerations for Research Involving (Speculative) Public Data. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 3, GROUP, Article 249 (dec 2019), 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3370271
  24. Research Ethics in HCI: A SIGCHI Community Discussion. In Extended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI EA ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 169, 3 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491101.3516400
  25. Casey Fiesler and Blake Hallinan. 2018. ”We Are the Product”: Public Reactions to Online Data Sharing and Privacy Controversies in the Media. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (, Montreal QC, Canada,) (CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173627
  26. Inclusive design toolkit for the creation of intergenerational gamified experiences. In Eighth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality. 707–712.
  27. Almas Ahmed Francesca Rossi, Noah Treviño. 2018. Everyday ethics for Artifical Intelligence.
  28. Research Ethics in HCI: A Town Hall Meeting. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (, Denver, Colorado, USA,) (CHI EA ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1295–1299. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3051135
  29. In-Action Ethics. Interacting with Computers 29, 2 (06 2016), 220–236. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iww024 arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/iwc/article-pdf/29/2/220/10296473/iww024.pdf
  30. Jody Freeman. 2000. Private Parties, Public Functions and the New Administrative Law. Administrative Law Review (2000), 813–858.
  31. Batya Friedman. 1996. Value-sensitive design. interactions 3, 6 (1996), 16–23.
  32. A Survey of Value Sensitive Design Methods. Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction 11, 2 (2017), 63–125. https://doi.org/10.1561/1100000015
  33. Value sensitive design and information systems. Early engagement and new technologies: Opening up the laboratory (2013), 55–95.
  34. Co-designing resources for ethics education in HCI. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–5.
  35. Felt Ethics: Cultivating Ethical Sensibility in Design Practice. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (, Hamburg, Germany,) (CHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 1, 15 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580875
  36. Jet Gispen. [n. d.]. Ethical Disclaimer. https://www.ethicsfordesigners.com/ethical-disclaimer
  37. Colin M. Gray and Shruthi Sai Chivukula. 2019. Ethical Mediation in UX Practice. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300408
  38. Scaffolding Ethics-Focused Methods for Practice Resonance. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (Pittsburgh, PA, USA) (DIS ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2375–2391. https://doi.org/10.1145/3563657.3596111
  39. The dark (patterns) side of UX design. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–14.
  40. Practitioner Trajectories of Engagement with Ethics-Focused Method Creation. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2210.03002 arXiv:2210.03002 [cs.HC]
  41. Ben Green. 2021. The contestation of tech ethics: A sociotechnical approach to technology ethics in practice. Journal of Social Computing 2, 3 (2021), 209–225.
  42. Cracks in the Success Narrative: Rethinking Failure in Design Research through a Retrospective Trioethnography. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 28, 6, Article 42 (nov 2021), 31 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3462447
  43. The policy knot: re-integrating policy, practice and design in cscw studies of social computing. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (Baltimore, Maryland, USA) (CSCW ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 588–602. https://doi.org/10.1145/2531602.2531674
  44. Values as Hypotheses: Design, Inquiry, and the Service of Values. Design Issues 31, 4 (2015), 91–104. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43830434
  45. Bert-Jaap Koops. 2008. Criteria for Normative Technology. Regulating Technologies. Legal Futures, Regulatory Frames and Technological Fixes. Oxford/Portland: Hart Publishing (2008), 157–174.
  46. Kari Kuutti and Liam J Bannon. 2014. The turn to practice in HCI: towards a research agenda. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 3543–3552.
  47. Christopher A. Le Dantec and Sarah Fox. 2015. Strangers at the Gate: Gaining Access, Building Rapport, and Co-Constructing Community-Based Research. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (CSCW ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1348–1358. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675147
  48. Values as lived experience: evolving value sensitive design in support of value discovery. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Boston, MA, USA) (CHI ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1141–1150. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518875
  49. Implications for Adoption. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Denver, Colorado, USA) (CHI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025742
  50. Wendy E. Mackay. 1995. Ethics, lies and videotape…. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Denver, Colorado, USA) (CHI ’95). ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., USA, 138–145. https://doi.org/10.1145/223904.223922
  51. Co-Designing Checklists to Understand Organizational Challenges and Opportunities around Fairness in AI. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (, Honolulu, HI, USA,) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376445
  52. Fréderic Moyersoen. 2004. Saboteur.
  53. Situational Ethics: Re-thinking Approaches to Formal Ethics Requirements for Human-Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (CHI ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702481
  54. Dealing with ethical challenges in HCI fieldwork. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–3.
  55. Envisioning systemic effects on persons and society throughout interactive system design. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (Cape Town, South Africa) (DIS ’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/1394445.1394446
  56. Disruptions, dilemmas and paradoxes: Ethical matter (s) in design research. Interacting with Computers (2016), 1–9.
  57. A Scoping Review of Ethics Across SIGCHI. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (, Virtual Event, Australia,) (DIS ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1145/3532106.3533511
  58. Aadarsh Padiyath. 2024. A Realist Review of Undergraduate Student Attitudes towards Ethical Interventions in Technical Computing Courses. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (2024).
  59. Nassim Parvin. 2018. Doing justice to stories: On ethics and politics of digital storytelling. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 4 (2018), 515–534. https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2018.248
  60. No Humans Here: Ethical Speculation on Public Data, Unintended Consequences, and the Limits of Institutional Review. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 6, GROUP, Article 38 (jan 2022), 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3492857
  61. Margaret Anne Pierce and John W Henry. 1996. Computer ethics: The role of personal, informal, and formal codes. Journal of business ethics 15 (1996), 425–437.
  62. Exploring the experience of ethical tensions and the role of community in UX practice. In Nordic Human-Computer Interaction Conference. 1–13.
  63. Who Should Act? Distancing and Vulnerability in Technology Practitioners’ Accounts of Ethical Responsibility. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 8, CSCW1, Article 157 (apr 2024), 27 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3637434
  64. Vulnerability as an ethical stance in soma design processes. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (, New Orleans, LA, USA,) (CHI ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 178, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501994
  65. Out of Time, Out of Place: Reflections on Design Workshops as a Research Method. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (San Francisco, California, USA) (CSCW ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1131–1141. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2820021
  66. Changes in Research Ethics, Openness, and Transparency in Empirical Studies between CHI 2017 and CHI 2022. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (, Hamburg, Germany,) (CHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 505, 23 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580848
  67. The Hero’s Journey: An art-based method in social design. Research in Arts and Education 2018, 3 (2018), 129–149.
  68. Christopher D Schmidt. 2014. Questioning intuition through reflective engagement. Journal of Moral Education 43, 4 (2014), 429–446.
  69. Donald A Schön. 1992. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge.
  70. Fairness and Abstraction in Sociotechnical Systems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (Atlanta, GA, USA) (FAT* ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287598
  71. Reflective Design. In Proceedings of the 4th Decennial Conference on Critical Computing: Between Sense and Sensibility (Aarhus, Denmark) (CC ’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1145/1094562.1094569
  72. Katie Shilton. 2013. Values Levers: Building Ethics into Design. Science, Technology, & Human Values 38, 3 (2013), 374–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243912436985
  73. Katie Shilton. 2018. Engaging values despite neutrality: Challenges and approaches to values reflection during the design of internet infrastructure. Science, Technology, & Human Values 43, 2 (2018), 247–269.
  74. Katie Shilton et al. 2018. Values and ethics in human-computer interaction. Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction 12, 2 (2018), 107–171.
  75. Moral intensity and ethical decision-making of marketing professionals. Journal of Business research 36, 3 (1996), 245–255.
  76. CHI4EVIL: Creative Speculation on the Negative Impacts of HCI Research. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI EA ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3299033
  77. How to do better with gender on surveys: a guide for HCI researchers. Interactions 26, 4 (jun 2019), 62–65. https://doi.org/10.1145/3338283
  78. Erik Stolterman. 2008. The nature of design practice and implications for interaction design research. International Journal of Design 2, 1 (2008).
  79. Consequences, Schmonsequences! Considering the Future as Part of Publication and Peer Review in Computing Research. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (, Yokohama, Japan,) (CHI EA ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 95, 4 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3441330
  80. Consequences, Schmonsequences! Considering the Future as Part of Publication and Peer Review in Computing Research. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan¡/country) (CHI EA ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 95, 4 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3441330
  81. Critical Affects: Tech Work Emotions Amidst the Techlash. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW1, Article 179 (apr 2021), 27 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449253
  82. Beyond the Belmont Principles: Ethical Challenges, Practices, and Beliefs in the Online Data Research Community. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (San Francisco, California, USA) (CSCW ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 941–953. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2820078
  83. Ethical encounters in HCI: Research in sensitive settings. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. 2369–2372.
  84. It’s about power: What ethical concerns do software engineers have, and what do they (feel they can) do about them?. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (Chicago, IL, USA) (FAccT ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 467–479. https://doi.org/10.1145/3593013.3594012
  85. Richmond Y. Wong. 2021. Tactics of Soft Resistance in User Experience Professionals’ Values Work. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW2, Article 355 (oct 2021), 28 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479499
  86. Seeing Like a Toolkit: How Toolkits Envision the Work of AI Ethics. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 7, CSCW1, Article 145 (apr 2023), 27 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3579621
  87. Richmond Y Wong and Tonya Nguyen. 2021. Timelines: A world-building activity for values advocacy. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–15.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (3)
  1. Inha Cha (4 papers)
  2. Ajit G. Pillai (2 papers)
  3. Richmond Y. Wong (16 papers)

Summary

Ethics Pathways: Reflecting on Ethics Engagement in HCI Research

Authors: Inha Cha, Ajit G. Pillai, Richmond Wong

Overview

The paper "Ethics Pathways: A Design Activity for Reflecting on Ethics Engagement in HCI Research" presents a novel design activity aimed at understanding how Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) and design researchers engage with ethics throughout their research processes. Despite the apparent ethical commitments within these fields, challenges persist in grasping the complex and situated nature of researchers' engagement with ethical issues. The Ethics Pathways activity was developed to probe these complexities and offer a structured approach to facilitate reflection among researchers about their past ethical engagements.

Activity Structure

The Ethics Pathways activity consists of five main steps, designed to help participants reflect on and articulate their ethical decision-making processes:

  1. Sensitizing Participants to Their Ethical Issues: Participants are invited to reflect on any ethical issues they may have encountered in their research prior to the session.
  2. Incident Description: Participants recall and describe an initial ethical incident that occurred during their research.
  3. Character Design: Participants use pawn pieces to represent themselves and other stakeholders involved in the ethical situation.
  4. Path Design and Action Notes: Participants create a visual map using path cards to depict their ethical journey, including both actual and speculative actions.
  5. Reflection and Emotion Walk-through: Participants revisit their paths and reflect on their emotional responses, the actions of stakeholders, and the resources they utilized.

Design Iteration and Facilitation

The activity underwent multiple iterations, guided by pilot and playtesting sessions with HCI and design researchers. Initial versions included various design elements and metaphors, such as 3D-printed vehicles and environmental obstacles, which were gradually simplified. Feedback indicated that focusing on "paths" and providing abstract pawn pieces for stakeholder representation facilitated more meaningful reflections on ethical decisions.

Facilitators played a crucial role in prompting participants to think aloud and critically reflect on their actions and choices. This iterative process led to a final version that effectively combines visual mapping with narrative reflection, fostering participants' ability to introspect and articulate their ethical engagements.

Insights on Ethics Engagement

Ethics Pathways provides a lens for understanding the concept of "ethics flows," emphasizing that ethical action is not only about outcomes but also about the ongoing, dynamic processes researchers navigate within their institutional contexts. The activity revealed that ethical issues are deeply embedded in the organizational and social structures of research environments, with participants often encountering power dynamics and institutional barriers.

For instance, one participant (P4) reflected on the ethical dilemma of conducting UX research for an ethically questionable company while being a junior researcher. The activity allowed them to explore alternative actions and understand the constraints imposed by their organizational context. Another participant (P2) described ethical challenges related to the use of research data by military and police institutions, highlighting complex stakeholder relationships.

Implications and Future Applications

The research underscores the importance of considering ethics engagement as an ongoing practice influenced by personal experiences, institutional infrastructures, and social interactions. This perspective opens new avenues for HCI and design research to develop tools and interventions addressing the broader social and institutional factors affecting ethical decision-making.

Several potential future applications and directions for Ethics Pathways include:

  • Organizational Ethics Interventions: Designing tools that address ethics at an institutional level, considering organizational policies, power structures, and incentives.
  • Reflective Practices: Developing long-term reflection tools for researchers to continually engage with ethical considerations beyond formal ethics reviews.
  • Educational Integration: Incorporating Ethics Pathways into educational curricula to help train new researchers in critical and reflective ethical thinking.

Ethics Pathways contributes to the discourse on research ethics by providing a structured methodology that captures the nuanced and situated nature of ethical engagement, highlighting the multifaceted and often non-linear nature of ethical decision-making in HCI and design research contexts. This approach not only facilitates deeper personal reflection but also offers valuable insights into the broader institutional dynamics that shape ethical practices in research.

File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com PDF File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Markdown