“Strongly Recommended” Revisiting Decisional Privacy to Judge Hypernudging in Self-Tracking Technologies

Abstract

This paper explores and rehabilitates the value of decisional privacy as a conceptual tool, complementary to informational privacy, for critiquing personalized choice architectures employed by self-tracking technologies. Self-tracking technologies are promoted and used as a means to self-improvement. Based on large aggregates of personal data and the data of other users, self-tracking technologies offer personalized feedback that nudges the user into behavioral change. The real-time personalization of choice architectures requires continuous surveillance and is a very powerful technology, recently coined as Bhypernudging.^While users celebrate the increased personalization of their coaching devices, Bhypernudging^technologies raise concerns about manipulation. This paper addresses that intuition by claiming that decisional privacy is at stake. It thus counters the trend to solely focus on informational privacy when evaluating information and communication technologies. It proposes that decisional privacy and informational privacy are often part of a mutually reinforcing dynamic. Hypernudging is used as a key example to illustrate that the two dimensions should not be treated separately. Hypernudging self-tracking technologies compromise autonomy because they violate informational and decisional privacy. In order to effectively judge whether technologies that use hypernudges empower users, we need both privacy dimensions as conceptual tools.

Responsible AI—Two Frameworks for Ethical Design Practice

“…These concerns are true in traditional (face-to-face) therapy as well, but relying on digital online platforms, from EMRs, to online therapies, poses new risks to both informational and decisional privacy [65]. In Hertlein et al's [54] survey, participants expressed concerns about the authenticity of the user (such as "who has access to the computer" and "the [chance] of loss of control of who has the device at the other end"), about who else might be physically present in the same room as the counselor ("How can the therapist or client be sure no one else is in the vicinity of the computer-that is, how can you assure confidentiality?…”

Is tomorrow’s car appealing today? Ethical issues and user attitudes beyond automation

“…Danaher has developed an overview identifying the following concerns: dehumanization (Frischmann 2014;Royakkers et al 2018), cognitive degeneration (Carr 2015), and threats to personal freedom and autonomy (Crawford 2015;Floridi et al 2018). Lanzing (2018), in turn, argues that recommender systems are ethically problematic, because they tend to hyper-nudge users without their knowledge (and based on commercial interests), thus undermining autonomy. Others raise questions such as whether RS threaten personal happiness and fulfilment.…”

“…Furthermore, data collection is fuelling RS's machine learning as well as automatic decision-making (IEEE 2018). In recent years, we have witnessed controversies, where companies such as Facebook have used personal data for conducting experiments on users without their knowledge, or 'manipulated' data-driven personalized communication and behavioural targeting in the online realm (Lanzing 2018). Thus personal privacy is another topic of debate (see Borgesius et al 2016;Floridi and Taddeo 2016;Lanzing 2018).…”

“…We gathered this information by interviewing car manufacturers at the IAA conference.2 The features that provide personalized recommendations about where to dine, plan your travel, pay or services, are called "recommender systems"(Lanzing 2018).…”

Perspectives regarding privacy in clinical research among research professionals from the Arab region: an exploratory qualitative study

“…A sole focus on informational privacy, which is perhaps exacerbated by the belief that all that privacy in research requires is a focus on confidentiality assurances of research participants' data, ignores other types of privacy, such as physical privacy, proprietary privacy, decisional privacy, and association privacy [6,8]. Physical privacy involves the protection of individuals' physical (bodily modesty and integrity) and personal space (solitude); proprietary privacy includes control over personal identify and likeness, which includes control over photographs, facial features, and genetic information (controlling the "fate of the building blocks of life" [6]; decisional privacy has been labeled as a type of freedom and includes the ability to make choices without the interference from others, (e.g., government) as well as freedom from intrusions and interference of the mind that can manipulate decisions and behavior; e.g., hyper nudging that occurs on social media [9]; and association privacy includes the ability to congregate in groups without interference. While informational privacy in research is certainly important, as the collection of private, sensitive data is what enables the aim of research, but activities involved with recruitment and the collection of data include intrusions in the other spheres of privacy (e.g., physical, proprietary, and decisional) to which permission is required from the participants.…”