A touching app voice thinking about ethics of persuasive technology through an analysis of mobile smoking-cessation apps

The Ethics of Digital Well-Being: A Thematic Review

“…A variety of barriers to accessibility were discussed. They include poor interface design that impedes segments of the population, such as elderly patients, from accessing a particular service (Sánchez et al 2015 ); overly complex presentation of information that prevents users from making sense or practical use of the recommendations (Rughiniş et al 2015 ); and prohibitive costs associated with the development of the relevant technology (Sharkey and Sharkey 2012 ). Therefore, it is promising to see advanced technologies, such as assistive robotics or medical-grade monitoring devices, being targeted towards consumers, hopefully with the intention of improving accessibility.…”

“…These five dimensions help to bring some aspects of autonomy into greater focus but may also obscure others. For example, although Rughiniş et al ( 2015 ) make room for social relatedness within their five dimensions, defenders of substantive-relational accounts of autonomy may argue that it requires greater emphasis as a dimension in its own right (MacKenzie 2008 ).…”

“…In connection with this aspect, Rughiniş et al ( 2015 ) argue that the ‘truthfulness’ of communicative messages requires further study, as the manner in which motivational notifications and nudges are framed could have a negative impact on an individual’s well-being. For example, the fast and frugal nature of app communication, influenced by design principles from persuasive technology that target an individual’s cognitive biases, often favours interventions on an individual’s extrinsic motivation (Desmet and Pohlmeyer 2013 ).…”

“…maximising engagement) (see Burr et al 2018 for a discussion). Unsurprisingly, therefore, the ethical issues related to autonomy are discussed across a wide-range of records, spanning fields such as psychology, philosophy, public health, and design studies (Calvo and Peters 2013;Desmet and Pohlmeyer 2013;Hart 2016;Lehavot et al 2012;Rughiniş et al 2015;Taddeo 2014;Vallor 2010;Van Hooren et al 2007). However, the approaches taken to autonomy differ widely, suggesting that particular aspects of the concept are only perspicuous when considering specific implementations of digital technology (e.g., an assistive technology for home care).…”

“…However, the approaches taken to autonomy differ widely, suggesting that particular aspects of the concept are only perspicuous when considering specific implementations of digital technology (e.g., an assistive technology for home care). Rughiniş et al (2015), for example, extract five dimensions of autonomy that are useful for understanding the mediating role that health and well-being apps have on the communication of information. The dimensions are (a) degree of control and involvement that the user has within the app; (b) degree of personalisation over the apps functionality; (c) degree of truthfulness and reliability related to the information presented to the user, and how this affects their decisions; (d) user's own selfunderstanding regarding the goal-pursuit, and whether the app promotes or hinders a user's awareness of their own agency; and (e) whether the app promotes some form of moral deliberation or moral values in the actions it recommends.…”