Don't "research fast and break things": On the ethics of Computational Social Science

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2206.06370v1
• Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2022 09:51:19 GMT
• Title: Don't "research fast and break things": On the ethics of Computational Social Science
• Authors: David Leslie
• Abstract summary: This article provides a taxonomy of the ethical challenges faced by researchers in the field of CSS. It then argues for the end-to-end incorporation of habits of responsible research and innovation into CSS practices. In proposing the inclusion of habits of RRI in CSS practices, the chapter lays out several practical steps needed for ethical, trustworthy, and responsible CSS research activities.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: This article is concerned with setting up practical guardrails within the research activities and environments of CSS. It aims to provide CSS scholars, as well as policymakers and other stakeholders who apply CSS methods, with the critical and constructive means needed to ensure that their practices are ethical, trustworthy, and responsible. It begins by providing a taxonomy of the ethical challenges faced by researchers in the field of CSS. These are challenges related to (1) the treatment of research subjects, (2) the impacts of CSS research on affected individuals and communities, (3) the quality of CSS research and to its epistemological status, (4) research integrity, and (5) research equity. Taking these challenges as a motivation for cultural transformation, it then argues for the end-to-end incorporation of habits of responsible research and innovation (RRI) into CSS practices, focusing on the role that contextual considerations, anticipatory reflection, impact assessment, public engagement, and justifiable and well-documented action should play across the research lifecycle. In proposing the inclusion of habits of RRI in CSS practices, the chapter lays out several practical steps needed for ethical, trustworthy, and responsible CSS research activities. These include stakeholder engagement processes, research impact assessments, data lifecycle documentation, bias self-assessments, and transparent research reporting protocols.

Related papers

• The Story is Not the Science: Execution-Grounded Evaluation of Mechanistic Interpretability Research [56.80927148740585]
  We address the challenges of scalability and rigor by flipping the dynamic and developing AI agents as research evaluators.<n>We use mechanistic interpretability research as a testbed, build standardized research output, and develop MechEvalAgent.<n>Our work demonstrates the potential of AI agents to transform research evaluation and pave the way for rigorous scientific practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-05T19:00:02Z)
• Navigating the Ethics of Internet Measurement: Researchers' Perspectives from a Case Study in the EU [0.7964501839324883]
  We find that researchers deal with five main ethical challenges: privacy and consent issues, the possibility of unintended harm, balancing transparency with security and accountability, uncertain ethical boundaries, and hurdles in the ethics review process.<n>Researchers express that ethical requirements vary across institutions, jurisdictions and conferences, and ethics review boards often lack the technical knowledge to evaluate Internet measurement research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-13T15:29:19Z)
• Bridging the Gap: Integrating Ethics and Environmental Sustainability in AI Research and Practice [57.94036023167952]
  We argue that the efforts aiming to study AI's ethical ramifications should be made in tandem with those evaluating its impacts on the environment. We propose best practices to better integrate AI ethics and sustainability in AI research and practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-01T13:53:11Z)
• Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation [58.064940977804596]
  A plethora of new AI models and tools has been proposed, promising to empower researchers and academics worldwide to conduct their research more effectively and efficiently. Ethical concerns regarding shortcomings of these tools and potential for misuse take a particularly prominent place in our discussion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T18:26:45Z)
• The Only Way is Ethics: A Guide to Ethical Research with Large Language Models [53.316174782223115]
  'LLM Ethics Whitepaper' is an open resource for NLP practitioners and those tasked with evaluating the ethical implications of others' work. Our goal is to translate ethics literature into concrete recommendations and provocations for thinking with clear first steps. 'LLM Ethics Whitepaper' distils a thorough literature review into clear Do's and Don'ts, which we present also in this paper.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T16:14:43Z)
• Ethics Pathways: A Design Activity for Reflecting on Ethics Engagement in HCI Research [18.426314819481576]
  Ethics Pathways 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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-26T18:16:27Z)
• Towards Incorporating Researcher Safety into Information Integrity Research Ethics [2.0305676256390934]
  We argue that researcher protections should be more explicitly considered and acknowledged in internet research studies. We argue that researcher protections should be considered alongside more standard ethical considerations for participants and for broader society.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-14T23:16:12Z)
• Responsible AI Considerations in Text Summarization Research: A Review of Current Practices [89.85174013619883]
  We focus on text summarization, a common NLP task largely overlooked by the responsible AI community. We conduct a multi-round qualitative analysis of 333 summarization papers from the ACL Anthology published between 2020-2022. We focus on how, which, and when responsible AI issues are covered, which relevant stakeholders are considered, and mismatches between stated and realized research goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T15:35:36Z)
• Report of the 1st Workshop on Generative AI and Law [78.62063815165968]
  This report presents the takeaways of the inaugural Workshop on Generative AI and Law (GenLaw) A cross-disciplinary group of practitioners and scholars from computer science and law convened to discuss the technical, doctrinal, and policy challenges presented by law for Generative AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-11T04:13:37Z)
• The Participatory Turn in AI Design: Theoretical Foundations and the Current State of Practice [64.29355073494125]
  This article aims to ground what we dub the "participatory turn" in AI design by synthesizing existing theoretical literature on participation. We articulate empirical findings concerning the current state of participatory practice in AI design based on an analysis of recently published research and semi-structured interviews with 12 AI researchers and practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T05:30:42Z)
• Factoring the Matrix of Domination: A Critical Review and Reimagination of Intersectionality in AI Fairness [55.037030060643126]
  Intersectionality is a critical framework that allows us to examine how social inequalities persist. We argue that adopting intersectionality as an analytical framework is pivotal to effectively operationalizing fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-16T21:02:09Z)
• The right to audit and power asymmetries in algorithm auditing [68.8204255655161]
  We elaborate on the challenges and asymmetries mentioned by Sandvig at the IC2S2 2021. We also contribute a discussion of the asymmetries that were not covered by Sandvig. We discuss the implications these asymmetries have for algorithm auditing research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-16T13:57:41Z)
• Why Should Adversarial Perturbations be Imperceptible? Rethink the Research Paradigm in Adversarial NLP [83.66405397421907]
  We rethink the research paradigm of textual adversarial samples in security scenarios. We first collect, process, and release a security datasets collection Advbench. Next, we propose a simple method based on rules that can easily fulfill the actual adversarial goals to simulate real-world attack methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-19T15:53:36Z)
• ESR: Ethics and Society Review of Artificial Intelligence Research [11.4503292891152]
  We have developed the Ethics and Society Review board (ESR), a feedback panel that works with researchers to mitigate negative ethical and societal aspects of AI research. This article describes the ESR as we have designed and run it over its first year across 41 proposals. We analyze aggregate ESR feedback on these proposals, finding that the panel most commonly identifies issues of harms to minority groups, inclusion of diverse stakeholders in the research plan, dual use, and representation in data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-22T03:23:42Z)
• Thinking Through and Writing About Research Ethics Beyond "Broader Impact" [1.505509197162783]
  In March 2021, we held the first instalment of the tutorial on thinking through and writing about research ethics beyond 'Broader Impact' The goal of this tutorial was to offer a conceptual and practical starting point for engineers and social scientists interested in thinking more expansively. This report provides an outline of the tutorial, and contains our 'lifecourse checklist'
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-16T16:24:05Z)
• Ethical issues with using Internet of Things devices in citizen science research: A scoping review [1.933681537640272]
  This chapter presents a scoping review of published scientific studies that utilise both citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices. We selected studies where the authors had included at least a short discussion of the ethical issues encountered during the research process. Following this analysis, our discussion provides recommendations for researchers who wish to integrate citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices into their research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-18T12:22:05Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.