Values as lived experience

Abstract

The Value Sensitive Design (VSD) methodology provides a comprehensive framework for advancing a value-centered research and design agenda. Although VSD provides helpful ways of thinking about and designing value-centered computational systems, we argue that the specific mechanics of VSD create thorny tensions with respect to value sensitivity. In particular, we examine limitations due to value classifications, inadequate guidance on empirical tools for design, and the ways in which the design process is ordered. In this paper, we propose ways of maturing the VSD methodology to overcome these limitations and present three empirical case studies that illustrate a family of methods to effectively engage local expressions of values. The findings from our case studies provide evidence of how we can mature the VSD methodology to mitigate the pitfalls of classification and engender a commitment to reflect on and respond to local contexts of design.

From Research Prototype to Research Product

“…Many works have developed new approaches to better take into account the ways in which interactive systems become entangled in people's lives (e.g., [9,13,17,33,42]). A strand of HCI research has investigated design strategies for creating technology that more fluidly be transformed and situated to people's everyday practices.…”

Creating Conditions for Patients' Values to Emerge in Clinical Conversations

“…Values in Design Research-Le Dantec et al [22] argued that designers should seek to discover values as phenomena situated in and enacted through particular contexts. While early publications in value-sensitive design (VSD) suggested a set of 12 potentially universal values of ethical import [11], later publications clarified that VSD did not intend to make strong claims regarding the universality of values [5].…”

“…More recent work by Houston et al [18] has adopted the stance of viewing values as local to specific design contexts (as opposed to universal), and not as fixed entities but aspects of practice that are produced and reproduced in action (following theories of practice [27]). In this paper we adopt the perspectives of Le Dantec et al [22] and Houston et al [18] to examine how patient values emerge in clinical practice.…”

Designing robots with care

“…Instead, Introna suggests the approach of disclosive computer ethics [Brey , 2010] as a way of uncovering the values at stake which pertain to the specic technical details of the system. This method is an exhaustive one identifying and analysing every value possible but one is still left wondering how Dantec et al [2009] with regards to the VSD methodology; that values ought to be understood in situ, in context. This also adheres to the suggestion of care ethicist Joan Tronto in terms of understanding the particularized nature, and necessity thereof, of care institutions [Tronto, 2010].…”

“…Le Dantec et al reinforce the idea that values may be universal or generally accepted but dier in their interpretation. Because of this, Le Dantec et al suggest a way in which the methodology of VSD may be strengthened, through an uncovering of values in situ, or discovering values through experiencing the practice [Le Dantec et al, 2009]. This is of course due to the idea that dierences exist between designers' values and users' values [Nathan et al, 2008] The idea of embedded values is best understood as a claim that technological artefacts have built-in tendencies to promote or demote the realization of particular values.…”