See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/225493059

Ethics and technology design

Article in Ethics and Information Technology · March 2007

CITATIONS READS

87 1,469

1 author:

Anders Albrechtslund
Aarhus University
29 PUBLICATIONS 611 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Childhood, Intimacy and Surveillance Practices View project

Surveillance in Urban Spaces View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Anders Albrechtslund on 19 December 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Ethics and technology design

Anders Albrechtslund
Department of Communication and Psychology, Aalborg University, Kroghstraede 3,
DK-9220, Aalborg East, Denmark
E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract. This article offers a discussion of the connection between technology and values and, specifically, I
take a closer look at ethically sound design. In order to bring the discussion into a concrete context, the theory
of Value Sensitive Design (VSD) will be the focus point. To illustrate my argument concerning design ethics, the
discussion involves a case study of an augmented window, designed by the VSD Research Lab, which has
turned out to be a potentially surveillance-enabling technology. I call attention to a ‘‘positivist problem’’ that
has to do with the connection between the design context and the use context, which VSD seems to presuppose,
and I argue that it is necessary to clearly distinguish between the two, since the designersÕ intentions do not
always correspond with the usersÕ practice; in fact, the relation between design and use is very complex and
principally unpredictable. Thus, a design theory must accept that foresight is limited to anticipation rather than
prediction. To overcome the positivist problem, I suggest a phenomenological approach to technology inspired
by Don IhdeÕs concept of multistability. This argument, which is general in nature and thus applies to any
theory of design ethics, is intended as a constructive criticism, which can hopefully contribute to the further
development of design ethics.

Key words: ethics, multistability, surveillance, technology design, value sensitive design

Introduction
Even though the focus is on VSD, I consider the
In this article I will discuss the connection between presented arguments to be general in the sense that
technology and values and, specifically, I take a closer they apply to any theory of design ethics. Similarly,
look at ethically sound design. In order to bring the the illustrative case of the surveillance-enabling aug-
discussion into a concrete context, the theory of Value mented window could be replaced by any other case
Sensitive Design (VSD) will be my focus point, and to of technology design. However, it should be men-
illustrate my arguments concerning design ethics, the tioned that the choice of a surveillance-enabling
discussion involves a case study of an augmented technology is not a coincidence. The research pre-
window, designed by the VSD Research Lab, which sented in this article is part of my doctoral disserta-
has turned out to be a potentially surveillance-enabling tion work on surveillance and ethics, so I am
technology that gives rise to privacy concerns. motivated by the long-term ambition to develop a
In the discussion of VSD, I call attention to a framework for ethical considerations when technol-
‘‘positivist problem’’ concerning the connection ogies are designed for purposes that directly or
between the design context and the use context, which indirectly involves surveillance.
the theory seems to presuppose. I argue that it is It should also be stressed that my intention here is
necessary to clearly distinguish between the two, since not to reject the possibility of ethically sound design.
the designersÕ intentions do not always correspond On the contrary, my article is intended as a con-
with the usersÕ practice; in fact, the relation between structive criticism, which can hopefully contribute to
design and use is very complex and principally further developments of design ethics. In this way the
unpredictable. Thus, a design theory must accept that argument is based on the Socratic theory of knowl-
foresight is limited to anticipation rather than pre- edge, which emphatically states that to know what we
diction. To overcome the positivist problem, I suggest do not know is actually to know more. Similarly, I
a phenomenological approach to technology inspired argue that in order to improve our capabilities of
by Don IhdeÕs concept of multistability. designing ethically sound technology, we must
64 ANDERS ALBRECHTSLUND

acknowledge the limitations of what can be known to development of an urban road system seems to ‘‘have
the designers and, thus, be prepared for the funda- politics’’, since the infrastructure results in certain
mental openness of future use contexts. politically motivated consequences.
The article is divided into three parts, which also It can be argued that the bridges themselves do
indicate the progression of my argument: Firstly, not carry these specific political consequences, since
technology, values and ethics will be discussed in order bridges and road systems with the same function-
to establish and render probable that designing tech- ality, but with completely other political conse-
nology is also the shaping of an ethical scenario. Sec- quences, can easily be imagined. In reply, it must be
ondly, the theory of VSD is studied, and I call attention argued that artifacts or technology at least have
to the positivist problem involving the connection consequences of a non-technical nature, e.g. poli-
between design and use. Thirdly, the case of the sur- tics. Even though this example (Moses and the
veillance-enabling augmented window is discussed. urban planning in New York) might be historically
incorrect, it still makes up a good illustration of the
connection between technology and values.
Technology, values and ethics Another recent tradition relating to technology-
embedded values is the theories of user-centered
The preoccupation with the values embedded in design. As the name implies, the starting point of
technology can be traced through a long and complex these theories is how technology can be designed with
history, and the same is the case with the more nar- a focus on the usersÕ wants and needs. Central to such
row focus on technology and ethics. Even within the efforts is the involvement of the expectations of the
limited period of the twentieth century, it is difficult end-user in the design process and even, as seen in the
to give a comprehensive account due to the large theory of Participatory Design, inviting the users to
number of directions taken and the manifold disci- take part in the development phase. Besides Partici-
plines of departure. In the following I will highlight patory Design, prominent theories of user-centered
tendencies in the modern history of technology and design include Cooperative Design and Contextual
values, and I will discuss the characteristics of the Design as well as a number of influential books, e.g.
ethical approaches seen in the recent years. Donald A. NormanÕs The Design of Everyday Things
In his classic article ‘‘Do Artifacts Have Politics?’’ (1990). A number of the user-centered design theories
(1980),1 Langdon Winner famously describes the have their departure in the Scandinavian traditions of
development of the road system on Long Island, New computing and engineering in the 1970Õs, however,
York. Apparently, Robert Moses (1888–1981), the other more recent directions of thinking should be
responsible urban architect in New York City, had a mentioned. One development has been a change in
rather repellant political agenda, since he supposedly focus from the usersÕ wants and needs to the social
wanted to reserve the attractive beaches and recrea- construction of the user. This shift of attention to the
tional areas of Long Island for the wealthy.2 This power dynamics in the constitution of the user is, in
very controversial plan was carried out in secret by part, a result of contributions within the broad field
designing the bridges over the road system in a cer- of Science and Technology Studies (STS).
tain way: The bridges were built to be very low in As the brief history sketched out in the above
order to avoid public transportation, such as buses, indicates, it seems uncontroversial today to claim that
which were too high to pass. Only private cars could technology and values are mutually important; many
go under the bridges thus enabling the wealthier and diverse value aspects of technology, such as
people, who could afford to own cars, to have the politics, social impacts, environmental issues and
benefits of Long IslandÕs attractive areas, at the same ethics are well recognized in the academic debate, just
time as the poorer people who had to rely on public as technology is considered to be an important topic
buses were in practice kept away. Accordingly, the within the disciplines relating to these topics.
Jeroen van den Hoven has recently suggested an
1
First published in the journal Daedalus, Vol. 109, No. 1, interpretation of the modern history of ethics and IT
Winter 1980 and later reprinted in Langdon Winner: The as a development towards a current focus on design
Whale and the Reactor L. Winner. The whale and the
and values.3 Ethics in the beginning of the modern
reactor: a search for limits in an age of high technology.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, London, 1986.
2 3
This thesis has been disputed by Bernward Joerges and This interpretation of the modern history of ethics and
others. In an article with the clever play on words: ‘‘Do Pol- technology by Professor Jeroen van den Hoven was sug-
itics Have Artifacts?’’ B. Joerges. Do Politics Have Artefacts? gested in his keynote address ‘‘Values, Design and Infor-
Social Studies of Science, 29, 3, 411–431, 1999, Joerges rejects mation Technology: The front loading of ethics’’ delivered
WinnerÕs interpretation as historically incorrect. at ETHICOMP 2005.
 ETHICS AND TECHNOLOGY DESIGN 65

era until the twentieth century has been mainly to show, especially within social and behavioral sci-
occupied with theory, and the best known theories ences saw a broader focus. In this phase, a number of
include Immanuel KantÕs deontological critique of issues surfaced relating to situations and matters
practical reason, the utilitarian calculus of the involving IT such as work environment and the so-
greatest good for the greatest number, and, finally, called ‘‘digital divide’’. Since the late 1990Õs another
virtue ethics. These theories have dominated the shift in focus is traceable that has to do with ethics.
ethical debate within philosophy; however, in the The development of IT is increasingly getting atten-
mid-twentieth century the debate was broadened to tion from the humanities, including aesthetics and
include an application perspective. A number of ethics, and the characteristics of this new focus are
tangible problems concerning for instance medicine sensitivity to values ‘‘built in’’ to the technology.
and technology came into focus, which led to con- The history of ethics and IT, interpreted in this
siderations of the broader context of phenomena that way, come together in the focal points design and
were earlier thought of in isolation. An example of values. Ethics has developed from fully theory-
this trend is the discussions concerning the develop- oriented through application and context awareness
ment of atomic weapons at the end of the Second to a focus on the process of designing; similarly IT
World War. The irreversible consequences of atomic has gone from being solely technology driven through
weapons (and their use) seemed to demand ethical context awareness to value sensitivity. As a conse-
and political reflections, and the Danish physicist quence, a current and notable relation between ethics
Niels Bohr (1885–1962) was a well-known opponent and IT is the focus on values in the design process.
to the idea of using the insights of atomic physics to The characteristics of this shift in focus, according to
developing weapons of mass destruction. Once the van den Hoven, are a ‘‘front loading of ethics’’, which
atomic bombs were developed and the war was over, brings a number of new responsibilities. The overall
he proposed that the knowledge of atomic weapons, change in this front loading is a duty to look forward
at least, should be shared in the international science instead of backward when assessing the ethical
community thus avoiding the incipient atomic arms implications of IT. In this way, it is possible to
race, however, the thought of sharing atomic secrets overcome the notorious problem of technology
were opposed by Roosevelt as well as Churchill. assessment, namely that it takes place after the
Since the mid-twentieth century and the ‘‘applied technology is implemented and the ethical issues have
shift’’ within ethics, a wide range of other specific and become manifest. When ethics look ahead instead of
sometimes controversial issues have emerged. The backwards, ethical evaluations will not be about
branches of applied ethics include medical ethics, determining who to blame for mishaps and concerns,
legal ethics and, of course, computer and information since the ‘‘new’’ role of ethics will be to assist in the
ethics, and it is characteristic for these fields of study actual development and design of IT.
that both technical experts and scholars take part in In my opinion, Van den HovenÕs interpretation
the discussion. Over the years, these ethical branches shows that the preoccupation with the design process
have grown into established fields, and Computer has – or is about to – move a step further to the ethics
Ethics has become an independent tradition with a of the user. Whereas the first attempts with user-
number of peer-reviewed journals and international centered design were pragmatically oriented towards
conferences. Van den Hoven argues that in recent the userÕs wants and needs, and the social construc-
years, another development within ethics seems to be tivist approach concerns itself with how power rela-
emerging – a ‘‘design shift’’. These changes are tions can stabilize in the construction of the user, then
noticeable in that the focus of many contemporary the recent ethical approach attempts to throw light
ethicists seems to move from the consequences or on the scenario of possible ethical actions in which
impacts of technology, especially IT, to the shaping the user is situated. Also, this line of attack, which
or designing of technology and in particular IT. primarily has its roots in Computer Ethics, seems to
Similar to the shifts in focus within ethics from systematically involve the classical ethical theories
theory to design, van den Hoven suggests that the thus bridging the ethical tradition with the pragmat-
history of IT can be interpreted as a series of phases ics of design.
towards a focus on value. The first of these phases
simply focused on technology. This period of early
computerized IT ended roughly around 1980, and the Ethics and technology design
center of attention among developers and interest
groups was predominantly the many possibilities in The purpose of designing technology is most often to
the technology itself. However, in the 1980Õs and make it serve a certain function. This connection
1990Õs an increasing awareness of the context began between technology and functionality is, of course,
66 ANDERS ALBRECHTSLUND

rather obvious and uncontroversial. Moreover, the Proponents of VSD acknowledge that the two
connection between technology and values, including first mentioned fields, Computer Ethics and Social
the shaping of ethical scenarios, has been well- Informatics, have advanced our understanding of key
established in the twentieth century as described in values in the intersection of computer technology and
the above, and it is important to notice that the human lives and provided sound social–technical
ethical dimension is not optional; technology has analyses of deployed technologies.6 However, both
ethical implications regardless of whether the tech- theories seem to be too divorced from the technical
nology has been designed with this in mind or not. side of the problems and thus fail to be helpful in
Consequently, it becomes a much desired objective to providing practical knowledge of the design process
somehow be able to control both functionality and and actual implementation of technology. Similarly,
ethics in the design process, and this potentially CSCW has generated important knowledge regarding
far-reaching ambition raises a number of important the workplace, helping people collaborate more
questions. I will return to these questions after a brief effectively, but, unfortunately, the relatively narrow
introduction to a dominant design theory that takes focus (the workplace) and the emphasis on collabo-
ethical issues into account. ration disqualifies the theory in regards to ethics and
technology in general. The final theory, Participatory
Value sensitive design Design, has yielded important developments by
embedding democratic values into its practice, and
One of the most ambitious and promising approa- important techniques, such as Future Workshop, has
ches to ethically sound technology design is the been developed. However, like CSCW the theory of
theory of Value Sensitive Design (cf. Friedman Participatory Design is too limited, because it fails to
1997; Friedman et al. 2002; Friedman and Kahn provide adequate guidance when put into more
2003; Friedman 2004), which is affiliated with the diverse contexts.
VSD Research Lab, University of Washington,4 The Building on selected parts of the above mentioned
theory of VSD promises to take into account human theories and methods, VSD introduces ‘‘a unique
values: constellation of features’’ summed up in seven points
(cf. Friedman et al. 2002: 2):
‘‘Value Sensitive Design is a theoretically grounded
(1)VSD is proactive, as it influences the design process
approach to the design of technology that accounts
from beginning to end;
for human values in a principled and comprehen-
(2)VSD deals with a broad variety of contexts,
sive manner throughout the design process.’’
including the workplace, education, the home,
(Friedman, Kahn and Borning 2002: 1)
commerce, online communities and public life;
According to Friedman et al. (2002), VSD has a (3)VSD deals with a broad variety of human values,
number of advantages compared to other attempts to including cooperation, democracy and especially
combine design and ethics. The mentioned approa- values with moral import;
ches are Computer Ethics, Social Informatics, (4)VSD combines conceptual, empirical and technical
Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) aspects into an integrated methodology;
and Participatory Design, and the theory of VSD (5)VSD is interactional, because it combines the views
builds on these four fields of study, but in a way that that social systems affect technological develop-
compensates for their alleged shortcomings.5 ment, and new technologies contribute to the
shaping of individual behavior and social systems;
(6)VSD draws on ethical theory in order to attain a
4 principled approach of abstract ethical values to
The VSD Research Lab Homepage: http://www.
the design process that maintains certain universal
ischool.washington.edu/vs
5
Unfortunately, the scope of this article does not allow values regardless of casual opinions;
for an expanded discussion of these alleged shortcomings, (7)Ethical theory aside, VSD take into consideration
however, it should be noted that the VSD critique of concrete values that are universally held through
Computer Ethics, Social Informatics, Computer Supported different ages and cultures.
Cooperative Work (CSCW) and Participatory Design must
To put these seven features into action, a tripartite
be considered controversial and debatable. The aim of this
introduction to VSD is first of all to present the theory in methodology is proposed, and, accordingly, the
itself as convincingly and ‘‘strong’’ as possible – which
6
simply seems to be fair and, just as importantly, appears to Here and to the following cf. B. Friedman, P.H. Kahn
be the best way to avoid ‘‘straw man’’-arguments – before and A. Borning. Value Sensitive Design: Theory and
pointing out problems in the following discussion. Methods. University of Washington, 2002.
 ETHICS AND TECHNOLOGY DESIGN 67

design process is made up of conceptual, empirical at one of the cases that the VSD Research Lab has
and technical investigations (Friedman et al. 2002: worked on: Cookies and Informed Consent in Web
2–3). Firstly, the conceptual investigation is a Browsers.7 The purpose of this project is to improve
philosophically oriented analysis of values in gen- the support for informed consent when browsing on
eral, and how values are supported or diminished by the Internet. The first step was to carry out a con-
specific technology designs. Important to this part of ceptual investigation of ‘‘informed consent’’. To do
the design process is the sensitivity to the problems this the research team consulted relevant literature on
relating to the implementation of technology, since the subject in order to state more exactly what the
it is often necessary to compromise between con- concept implies. The second step was to validate and
flicting interests. According to the proponents, VSD refine their findings from the conceptual investigation
offers a suitable theory and method to marry the by taking on a technical investigation. The research
theoretical and the technical, unlike, e.g. Computer team decided to do a retrospective analysis of how
Ethics and Social Informatics (Friedman et al. 2002: cookie and web-browser technology had changed
1–2). For example, designers must frequently deal regarding informed consent over a period of five
with trade-offs between autonomy and trust, or years. They concluded that the support for informed
perhaps between privacy and security. Moreover, consent had improved, but the technology design was
the relative weight of ethics, functionality and even still inadequate. Based on the conceptual and tech-
aesthetics must constantly be considered. Secondly, nical investigation, the team then set out to redesign
an empirical investigation must complement the Mozilla, an open-source web-browser, in order to
conceptual investigation. Besides informing the the- improve the support for informed consent by
oretical analysis of values by contributing knowl- advancing the user-control over cookie management.
edge of the technical context, the empirical This third step involved empirical investigations,
investigation is a tool for evaluating a particular since evaluations of user experiences was a crucial
design by applying both qualitative and quantitative part of the design process. Through empirical inves-
methods. Thirdly, a technical investigation is carried tigations the team became aware that users wanted
out in order to identify the particular values that a control with the cookies, but it should be in a way
particular technology support and/or diminish, and that was minimally distracting. This led the team to
consequently: include minimal distraction in the conceptual framing
of informed consent and it inspired a certain technical
‘‘Value Sensitive Design adopts the position that solution in the design of the web-browser. These three
technologies in general, and information and steps demonstrate the flexibility of the design process,
computer technologies in particular, provide value since the tripartite methodology is intended to be
suitabilities that follow from properties of the mutually informative.
technology. That is, a given technology is more Before moving on to my main criticism of VSD
suitable for certain activities and more readily and similar design theories – the positivist problem
supports certain values while rendering other – I will mention another critical remark concerning
activities and values more difficult to realize. For the theoretical foundation. The seven points above
example, a screwdriver is well suited for tightening form a pragmatic approach to design ethics, but it
screws but functions poorly as a ladle, pillow, or seems to lack a fundamental discussion of ethical
wheel.’’ (Friedman, Kahn and Borning 2002: 3) theory. Even though VSD draws on ethical theory
and takes universal values into account (points six
In the same way as a screwdriver has a disposition for and seven), it is not exactly clear what theories and
a certain functionality, technology in general and which values this includes. Could VSD operational-
computer technology in particular have a disposition ize the ethics and values of, for instance, Nazi
for supporting or diminishing certain values and the Germany? This is, of course, not the intentions
technical investigation maps these dispositions. behind the theory, but unfortunately it seems to be
Moreover, the technical investigation proactively a possible way to go, since VSD, in principle,
shape technology according to the values identified in
the conceptual investigation. It should be noticed that 7
This project has been described in detail in a number of
technical analyses differ from empirical analyses in
texts (cf. the publications list at the VSD Research LabÕs
that the former focus on technology itself, whereas homepage), however, this presentation is based on Fried-
the latter focus on people and social systems influ- man et al. Ibid. and Friedman B. Friedman. Value Sensitive
enced by technology. Design. In Encyclopedia of human-computer interaction,
To illustrate how the VSD theory and its tripartite 769–774, Berkshire Publishing Group, Great Barrington,
methodology actually works, I will take a closer look MA, 2004.
68 ANDERS ALBRECHTSLUND

appears to be a ‘‘neutral’’ tool for any ethical theory process. One of many examples that come to mind is
and set of values – regardless of the good intentions the invention of the telephone (cf. Ronell, 1989),
behind. It seems to me that VSD must take the which was originally developed as a prosthetic device
foundational questions of ethics into account – for hearing-impaired, but, of course, eventually was
theoretically, not just pragmatically – and thus root found useful in other ways. It must be uncontrover-
the methods of design. sial to claim that even the most visionary designer
would have been unable to foresee the functionality
The positivist problem and ethical potential of the telephone, the computer
and other such technologies.
The theory and method of VSD represent a very To present the phenomenological arguments
sympathetic idea for developing technology, espe- against the positivist position I draw on Don IhdeÕs
cially when we contemplate a future scenario of work in philosophy of technology (cf. Ihde 1977,
ubiquitous computer technology. Even though many 1979, 1990, 1993a, b, 1998, 2002). A basic outcome of
elements of VSD is known from other contexts, just IhdeÕs extensive phenomenological analyses of
as the general ambition to administer all aspects of human–technology relations is that a defining char-
the design process is not new, the combination of acteristic of technology is that it enters into a context
theory and practice – conceptualization and ‘‘hands of use. The relational quality implies that technology
on’’ – seem to be as unique as the research team does not have an essence or basic meaning apart from
claim. However, the claim that VSD is a principled the use contexts it enters into, and to describe this
and comprehensive account of human values in ambiguity in technology Ihde introduces the central
design seem to be difficult to justify, as such a promise concept multistability. To illustrate the multistability
rely on the tacit premise that the intentions of care- of human–technology relations Ihde draws attention
fully designed technology will correspond with the to the so-called Necker Cube, which is an ambiguous
eventual use of technology. It is safe to say that VSD line drawing in isometric perspective. The drawing is
is a pragmatic approach to technology design, but I open to a number of valid interpretations, e.g. two
argue that it also reflects a moderated positivism, different perspectives of three-dimensional cubes;
since the premise mentioned above (design equals however, Ihde suggests that the drawing can be
use) must be nuanced substantially. The relationship interpreted in a number of other ways – e.g. as an
between designing and using is insufficiently imaginary ant-like animal. The point is that there is
explained and represent a challenge for the further not an interpretation more ‘‘true’’ or ‘‘absolute’’ than
development of the theory. It should be clarified that another and, similarly, human–technology relations
I am not arguing that design and use are principally can be stable in many different ways. The conse-
unrelated, which would make VSD and other theories quence of multistability is that it is necessary to
of design ethics futile, but I argue that careful con- abandon an essentialist or substantivist understand-
sideration must go into the limits of foresight. In ing of technology.
other words, it must be determined what can actually Returning to the above mentioned screwdriver
be predicted – functionally and ethically – in the example, the human-screwdriver relation is multista-
design process, what would be an informed guess, ble, because a wide range of use contexts can be
and, finally, what is simply beyond the knowledge of conceived. Thus, a screwdriver is not only for tight-
the designers. ening screws; when camping a screwdriver can be
The core of the positivist problem is the relation used as a peg for the tent and even to hammer down
between the design process and the eventual use of other pegs (or screwdrivers!); when at great risk a
technology. I name it ‘‘positivism’’, because it is the screwdriver can serve as a potentially dangerous
default position that the design of a technology will – weapon; modernist artists have used screwdrivers to
more or less – correspond with the use of technology scratch their paintings thus creating a particular
and that this relation does not pose a problem. I surface. The purpose of these examples is to empha-
consider this default position to be a problem, size that technological artifacts can enter into many
because design and use does not correspond just like very different human–technology relations and that a
that, which can be substantiated historically and technology is defined by its particular relational
phenomenologically. In this article I will not discuss context. A screwdriver might not serve well as a ladle,
the historical part of the argument, but just refer to pillow or wheel, but it can certainly be used for many
well-known examples of technology that have been other purposes than tightening screws – even in
used very differently than intended in the design contexts that we can hardly imagine. Technologies
process and, moreover, have had social and ethical are thus multistable, because they can be used for a
impacts, which were never imagined in the design wide range of purposes and they can be conceived of
 ETHICS AND TECHNOLOGY DESIGN 69

differently according to cultural, historical and social in the office. The experiment involves a comparative
contexts. study of two offices: The first one has a beautiful view
In order to overcome the described positivist of a nature scene, while the second one has the same
problem, I argue that VSD and any other design view, however, the view is shown on a large video
theory must abandon a substantivist–essentialist plasma display covering the wall area corresponding
approach to technology and thus acknowledge to the window in the first office. The projection on the
the limits of designing. Instead, I suggest that the screen is a live feed from a High Definition TV
tripartite method of VSD is developed in order to (HDTV) camera placed on the outside of the build-
include the multistable and relational characteristics ing. The research team collected data from a number
of technology. of sources (Friedman et al., 2004; Kahn and
Friedman, 2006): Psychological data from electro-
cardiograms (ECG); behavioral data from the test
Case study: windows and surveillance peopleÕs performance on cognitive and creativity
tasks; video and audio data of each participant as
To exemplify my criticism of VSD and other design they engaged in the experiment; social-cognitive data
theories based on what has been defined as positivism from interviews at the conclusion of the experiment.
and essentialism, I will turn to some of the projects by The findings from the project was that the display
the VSD Research Lab that involves surveillance- technology actually improved the work conditions
enabling technology. I choose this as an example for the people in the office, however, the ‘‘real thing’’,
instead of e.g. technologies that are designed specifi- the window with the view of a beautiful nature scene,
cally for purposes of targeted surveillance such as was – not surprisingly – even more beneficial. It is still
military spying devices and traffic cameras, since the an important result, since the augmented window is
VSD-developed technology is intended for other uses, better than the blank wall, and it must be concluded
but at the same time have the potential functionality that while display technology cannot replace real
of being surveillance technology. Thus, it is possible nature, the video plasma displays can improve offices
to emphasize the ‘‘hidden’’ aspects of design that that do not have windows.
becomes clear in the phenomenological analyses of The benefits from the augmented window, as
technology. A wide variety of technologies can be described by the VSD Research Lab, have the
surveillance-enabling, especially IT, and it seems to potential to improve offices and similar environ-
me that such devices in a future of ubiquitous com- ments. However, another finding from these projects
puting are one of the greatest challenges for ethically was the concern expressed by the people in the
sound designing. offices that the live feed from the video plasma
displays would invade the privacy of the people
Windows as surveillance-enabling technologies captured by the outside camera (Kahn and Friedman
2006). The aim of the display technology is to
Some of the projects undertaken by the VSD improve the environment for the people in offices,
Research Lab that deals with the design of surveil- but the video plasma display connected to the out-
lance-enabling technologies are ‘‘Room with an side camera is also a potential surveillance technol-
Augmented Window’’, ‘‘Office Window of the ogy. In this context, the people in the office become
Future’’ and ‘‘The Watcher and the Watched’’ (cf. watchers, the screen and camera becomes surveil-
Friedman et al. 2004; Friedman et al. in press). These lance technology, and the people outside are being
three connected projects aim at designing in a way watched.
that utilizes display technology to make a better office The VSD Research Lab has included this surveil-
environment while minimizing possible unwanted lance perspective in their work (Friedman et al., in
effects. press; Kahn and Friedman, 2006). In the project
The idea to put a ‘‘fake’’ window in an office stems ‘‘The Watcher and the Watched’’ the research team
from the perception that the experience of nature has studies the video plasma display and the outside
a number of beneficial effects for body and soul. Of camera as a surveillance-enabling technology with
course, this seems to be common sense which has as particular reference to privacy concerns. Besides the
well been substantiated by numerous other research direct stakeholders, which are the people in the offices
projects and this is also a conclusion from the project that are able to watch the people randomly captured
undertaken by the VSD Research Lab (Friedman by the outside camera, the investigation includes
et al., 2004). Thus, the ambition is to find out if a so-called ‘‘indirect’’ stakeholders, namely the people
display technology emulating a window can bring who by chance pass by the camera and are thus being
some of these beneficial effects to the people working displayed inside on the video plasma displays. The
70 ANDERS ALBRECHTSLUND

focus of the project is the opinions of direct and ground technologies, makes up a technological
indirect stakeholdersÕ on the boundaries of privacy in background, a ‘‘technosphere’’, for human relations.
public spaces and the question of informed consent. Yet, traditional windows can enter into a number of
In summary, the result of the investigation was that other relations, and to mention a few besides
both the people watching and the people being wat- surveillance, watching and spying as illustrated in
ched expressed concerns regarding the possible Rear Window, traditional windows can be constituted
invasion of privacy. as a technology of stealing, because a thief can enter
as well as escape a crime scene through windows, and,
Windows and multistability furthermore, a window can, tragically, even be used
as a technology of suicide as Gilles Deleuze (1925–
At a first reflection, it can be difficult to understand 1995) has demonstrated.8 The multistability of aug-
why an augmented window can be considered a mented windows is, obviously, very different from
possible invasion of privacy. The video plasma dis- traditional windows; though some human–technol-
play and the outside camera are, of course, advanced ogy relations remain similar, e.g., the worker–
technology which is emulating a basic technology, the window–nature relation, which the VSD Research
window, and the question is where the privacy Lab aims at recreating. It might be possible to com-
problem comes into existence. Under normal cir- mit suicide using the augmented window, but it is
cumstances, the installation of a window in an office certainly impossible to enter or escape a crime scene
building hardly gives rise to privacy concerns, even through a video plasma display.
though people in the office are able to watch people Returning to the privacy issue, the central problem
randomly passing by the window; so why the privacy to be addressed relates to the new possible relations
concerns with the augmented window? Some would that an augmented window can enter into. This new
argue that this is a symptom of excessive interest in technology is designed to emulate a traditional win-
privacy in connection with computer and information dow, but it brings about a wide range of possible
technology, and even though there might be some human–technology relations of which some might
truth to this statement, it is not the whole truth. lead to privacy concerns. An important limitation
It is interesting that the potential privacy problem when trying to foresee these potential relations is the
in connection with the augmented window does not fundamental openness implied in the concept of
have anything to do with the technology functioning multistability; it is in principle impossible to make a
as a window. When the video plasma display is con- comprehensive list of potential human–technology
stituted as a window, the privacy concerns must, relations. The consequence of this limitation is that
logically, be exactly the same as with any other win- future use contexts of technology cannot positively be
dow, and privacy is normally not a concern in that fully predicted in the design phase, and this calls for a
context. Of course, it could be the cause of such moderation of ambitions. However, some relations
concerns, since windows can be used for surveillance, can be foreseen, e.g. from the knowledge that a video
watching and spying, and a good example from plasma display facilitates storage and zooming in the
popular culture that treats this theme is the classic mediated view. This is, evidently, a potential privacy
Alfred Hitchcock movie Rear Window (1954) in invasion, since images of people randomly captured
which James Stewart and Grace Kelly solve a crime by the outside camera can be reproduced, enlarged,
by looking through a window. However, remember- manipulated and widely distributed. These charac-
ing the character of technology as discussed in the teristics, which the augmented window shares with a
previous part, the video plasma display in combina- number of other digital technologies, pose a topical
tion with the outside camera opens new possibilities challenge for information and computer ethics. One
for multistability compared to a traditional window. possible way to go in order to oppose these privacy
A traditional window is, of course, a vertical problems could simply be to remove the possibilities
opening in the wall covered with a transparent for storage and zooming and thus at least minimizing
material such as glass or plastic, and this is also a the concerns.
multistable technology. Most often, the traditional The challenge to designers of ethically sound
window functions as a so-called ‘‘background’’ technology is thus to imagine potential use contexts
technology – to put it in the terminology of Don
IhdeÕs philosophy of technology – which means that 8
It has been discussed whether DeleuzeÕs suicide should
it obviously has an influence (it provides a view of the be considered a human tragedy or an active affirmation of
outside and, in the daytime, lights up the room, etc.) life, taking his life (and the end of it) into his own hands
which is, however, seldom explicitly noticed. The A.P. Colombat. ‘‘November 4, 1995: DeleuzeÕs death as an
window, along with a wide range of other back- event’’. Man and World, 29, 235–249, 1996.
 ETHICS AND TECHNOLOGY DESIGN 71

and the ethical scenarios they create. In other words, gesting that Graham Bell could and should have
it is necessary to envision as many multistabilities as foreseen the ethical scenarios of todayÕs text message
possible while designing technology in order to youth culture, when he was transmitting the sound of
anticipate future ethical problems and dilemmas. This plucked steel reeds using electromagnet instruments
way of designing is very demanding, since it requires in the nineteenth century. Designers should be aware
creative thinking to imagine the near-unimaginable. of the limits of foresight, but still anticipate as many
As the phenomenology of technology discussed in multistabilities and ethical scenarios as possible in a
this article shows, the possible use contexts are process of ethical imagination.
inexhaustible, which suggests that the distance In the case of VSD, the combination of theoretical
between designersÕ intentions and the manifold tra- studies and ‘‘hands on’’ practice can, in my opinion,
jectories of use contexts are far greater than often be improved by implementing the understanding of
imagined, and this can be confirmed by the history of technology as multistable and relational as well as
technology. rooting the design process in a substantiated ethical
theory. Furthermore, the ambition to account for
human values in a principled and comprehensive
Conclusion manner must be limited to the more modest goal
of anticipating use contexts and ethical scenarios –
Technology is not only about serving functions well aware that the anticipation is, in principle,
designed by engineers, since there is a necessary value incomprehensive.
dimension implied in the context of use. This value
dimension puts a certain responsibility on the Acknowledgements
designers, as the value-related implications, including
the possible ethical scenarios, can to a certain extent I am grateful to Professor Peter Øhrstrøm (Aalborg
be anticipated in the design process. Many theories University, Denmark) for his valuable guidance and
have approached this issue, as discussed in the above, also to many other colleagues who have generously
and VSD is in my opinion a promising way to go, contributed to the development of this article with
though, not without problems. excellent comments and suggestions, including Helen
I suggest that any design theory must draw a clear Nissenbaum and Michael Zimmer at New York
line between intentions in design and the eventual use University, Peter-Paul Verbeek at University of
of technology. By clearly separating designersÕ Twente, The Netherlands, Thomas Ryberg at
intentions and the context of use, it is possible to Aalborg University, and Finn Olesen at Aarhus
acknowledge that these two contexts are, in fact, very University, Denmark. Finally, I have been helped in
different; in other words, the power of the designers the work process by having the opportunity to pres-
to control the user is limited. I consider this point – ent the arguments of this article at meetings and
emphatically expressed in the Socratic theory of conferences sponsored by the Aalborg UniversityÕs
knowledge – to be very important when developing a HCI Research School, New York UniversityÕs
design theory, since overestimating the reach of Department of Culture & Communication, and the
designing can, at worst, cause more problems than it International Association for Computing and
solves. A theory of design ethics that does not dis- Philosophy (E-CAP).
tinguish between intentions and future practice might
give users, legislators and others the impression that
technology developed under certain guidelines are References
somehow certified ‘‘foolproof’’ with regards to future
ethical problems and dilemmas. Of course, such an A.P. Colombat. November 4, 1995: DeleuzeÕs Death as an
ethical guarantee is not possible, as the multistability Event. Man and World, 29: 235–249, 1996.
of technology shows, and the failure to realize this B. Friedman, Human Values and the Design of Computer
could have the effect that people develop a false sense Technology. CSLI Publications & Cambridge University
of security. This can lead to less evaluation of tech- Press, Stanford, California & Cambridge, New York,
1997.
nology, and, again at worst, the ethical scenarios will
B. Friedman, P.H. Kahn and A. Borning. Value Sensitive
not only be unknown but misunderstood. Design: Theory and Methods. University of Washington,
Paradoxically, designers must pay special attention 2002.
to the potential uses not intended in the design pro- B. Friedman and P.H. Kahn. Human Values, Ethics, and
cess, as these might be ethically undesired. The Design. In The Human–Computer Interaction Handbook,
creativity of the designers to imagine these future pp. 1177–1201. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah
scenarios are, of course, also limited; I am not sug- NJ, 2003.
 72 ANDERS ALBRECHTSLUND

B. Friedman (2004) Value Sensitive Design. In Encyclope- D. Ihde, Expanding Hermeneutics: Visualism in Science.
dia of Human–Computer Interaction, pp. 769–774. Northwestern University Press, Evanston, Ill, 1998.
Berkshire Publishing Group, Great Barrington MA. D. Ihde, Bodies in Technology. University of Minnesota
B. Friedman, N.G. Freier and P.H. Kahn. Office window of Press, Minneapolis, 2002.
the future? Two case studies of an augmented window. B. Joerges. Do Politics Have Artefacts?. Social Studies of
CHI 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Science, 29(3): 411–431, 1999.
Systems, New York, NY. Association for Computing D.A Norman, The Design of Everyday Things. Doubleday,
Machinery. New York, 1990.
B. Friedman, P.H. Kahn, J. Hagman, R.L. Severson and P.H. Kahn and B. Friedman. Office window of the Future?
B. Gill. The watcher and the watched: social judgments (project overview). VSD Research Lab Homepage, URL:
about privacy in a public place. Human-Computer http://www.ischool.washington.edu/vsd/projects/Owf.
Interaction, in press. html (Last accessed 20 February 2006).
D. Ihde, Experimental Phenomenology: An Introduction. A. Ronell, The Telephone Book: Technology–Schizophrenia
Putnam, New York, 1977. –Electric speech. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln,
D. Ihde, Technics and Praxis. D. Reidel Pub. Co., 1989.
Dordrecht, Holland, Boston, 1979. L. Winner, The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits
D. Ihde, Technology and the Lifeworld: From Garden to in An Age of High Technology. University of Chicago
Earth. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1990. Press, Chicago, London, 1986.
D. Ihde, Philosophy of Technology: An Introduction.
Paragon House, New York, 1993a.
D. Ihde, Postphenomenology: Essays in the Postmodern
Context. Northwestern University Press, Evanston, Ill,
1993b.

View publication stats