The Quantified Relationship

Abstract

The growth of self-tracking and personal surveillance has given rise to the Quantified Self movement. Members of this movement seek to enhance their personal well-being, productivity and self-actualization through the tracking and gamification of personal data. The technologies that make this possible can also track and gamify aspects of our interpersonal, romantic relationships. Several authors have begun to challenge the ethical and normative implications of this development. In the present article, we build upon this work to provide a detailed ethical analysis of the Quantified Relationship (QR). We identify eight core objections to QR and subject them to critical scrutiny. We argue that although critics raise legitimate concerns, there are ways in which tracking technologies can be used to support and facilitate good relationships. We thus adopt a stance of cautious openness towards this technology and advocate the development of a research agenda for the positive use of QR technologies.

Integrating Social Scientific Perspectives on the Quantified Employee Self

“…As with traditional job design, the key ethical and motivational employee issue is the tension surrounding autonomy-self-tracking makes employees more freely transparent to themselves but limits their freedom by making them more observable to others (Lanzing 2016). Norms for radical self-disclosure and intense self-presentation are likely to be tested, and quantifying relationships and communities seem likely to raise strident and valid concerns (Danaher et al 2018). Yet, there are also great opportunities-disease prevention being one example (Barrett et al 2013).…”

The Rise of Citizen Science in Health and Biomedical Research

“…Health self-tracking is an ancient practice, and nearly 70% of Americans are believed to track at least one health indicator over time (Fox and Duggan 2013). QS studies often rely on proprietary or pay-for-play sensors and systems (Swan 2013), making them more individualist than a typical citizen science project, and particularly when they reflect on intimate activities, subject to privacy concerns (Danaher, Nyholm and Earp 2018). Table 1.…”

Privacy threats in intimate relationships

“…They may do so as a practical component of household management and communication [16], or because it is cost-effective to pool resources within the family. They may do so to establish and demonstrate intimacy [17] or trust [18,19] in a partner, or as a condition of access. Personal preferences and cultural expectations further complicate matters.…”