Rachelle Hollander

Ten simple rules for responsible big data research

The use of big data research methods has grown tremendously over the past five years in both academia and industry. As the size and complexity of available datasets has grown, so too have the ethical questions raised by big data research. These questions become increasingly urgent as data and research agendas move well beyond those typical of the computational and natural sciences, to more directly address sensitive aspects of human behavior, interaction, and health. The tools of big data research are increasingly woven into our daily lives, including mining digital medical records for scientific and economic insights, mapping relationships via social media, capturing individuals’ speech and action via sensors, tracking movement across space, shaping police and security policy via “predictive policing,” and much more.

Engineering Ethics: Looking Back, Looking Forward

The eight pieces constituting this Meeting Report are summaries of presentations made during a panel session at the 2011 Association for Practical and Professional Ethics (APPE) annual meeting held between March 3rd and 6th in Cincinnati. Lisa Newton organized the session and served as chair. The panel of eight consisted both of pioneers in the field and more recent arrivals. It covered a range of topics from how the field has developed to where it should be going, from identification of issues needing further study to problems of training the next generation of engineers and engineering-ethics scholars.

Network priorities for social sustainability research and education: Memorandum of the Integrated Network on Social Sustainability Research Group

Abstract The Integrated Network for Social Sustainability (INSS) is a research-coordination network supported by the National Science Foundation that is currently in its third year of activities. Individual and institutional members, representing a wide range of fields and interests, are devoted to addressing social sustainability as an important, understudied issue under the broader rubric of sustainability and sustainable development. The INSS has developed a number of affinity groups and a set of activities to facilitate its development. An annual conference draws members together to review and report on their efforts. At the first conference, a group interested in developing a research agenda formed. This Community Essay shares its members’ perspectives about priorities for future research and education on social sustainability, highlighting efforts for greater inclusion of marginalized populations in research.

US Engineering Ethics and Its Connections to International Activity

This chapter situates the field of engineering ethics in the US as one among other related specialties in professional ethics, particularly biomedical and research ethics. International interest in engineering ethics and social responsibility has broadened the conceptual frameworks and methodological approaches in the field. The chapter describes efforts of US government agencies, professional engineering societies, and the US National Academies (NA) including NA efforts that involve similar bodies in other countries, to address ethics in science and engineering research and practice in the US and abroad and to stimulate consideration of ethics in engineering education. It also describes on-going international activities to develop an international code of research ethics as well as a wide variety of standards that affect engineering practice. These activities and efforts provide part of a global background for engineering ethics education in the future.

Energy Ethics in Science and Engineering Education

Substantial global changes in energy production and use are occurring at present and will continue to occur for decades to come, with widespread ramifications for the distribution of wealth and power and humanity’s social and environmental future. This raises important ethical considerations that should be addressed in the education of engineers, whose research and practice will assuredly involve energy to some degree. The Energy Ethics in Science and Engineering Education Project, funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation, sought to enhance attention to and projects in energy ethics in graduate research education concerning energy. The partners, the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes (CSPO) at Arizona State University (ASU) and the Center for Engineering, Ethics, and Society (CEES) at the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), conducted a number of research, educational, and outreach activities to develop a foundational intellectual basis for understanding the ethics of energy transitions, to provide opportunities for students to learn about energy ethics, and to disseminate ideas and materials broadly. Evaluation results indicate the project has been successful in engaging students in various formats; additionally the project has illuminated a number of fundamental ideas about the interrelationships among energy, ethics, and society.

Mentoring: Supervision of Young Researchers

More and tighter coupling between academic and other social institutions has prompted increased attention to ethical aspects of the relationships between established researchers and researchers-in-training, including graduate students and new researchers in the United States and other countries. Questions about the responsibilities of individual and institutional parties to these relationships arise, and persons and institutions try to respond. This article reviews recent guidance that scholars and professional groups have developed, particularly in the United States, and ends with suggestions for departments and institutions that can help them fulfill requirements for appropriate mentoring and supervision.

In Response to the Editorial Entitled “On the Use of the Concept of “Fairness” in Ethics”

I found the recent editorial ‘‘On the Use of the Concept of ‘Fairness’ in Ethics’’ (Spier 2012) amusing and perplexing—amusing insofar as it demonstrated that editors’ prerogatives (and autonomy) are not dead, and perplexing insofar as it was difficult— nay, for me, just about impossible—to figure out why it had been published. What, other than relatively unsophisticated musings and well meaning ramblings—was it supposed to add to our wisdom about ethics in science and engineering? I might be being too harsh. In the second half of the editorial Spier does begin to talk about the need for laws administered for all—here I would say what he does not, that this is the notion of equal justice under the law. Earlier Spier has said that talk of fairness and justice is tautological, but I don’t think so. (See John Rawls.) Additionally, Spier wants to subsume the merits of justice under species survival. I’m not sure of that, nor has he argued for it. Justice may be a social virtue even for people who can’t work; where families or societies cannot fulfill basic needs for all, some will go without care, but isn’t that a far cry from subsuming justice to survivability? And why does he spend so much time in this editorial on fairness and market rewards? If the point is that reward hierarchies should be subsumed to criteria about justice, Spier should have alerted us to this at the outset, and spent some time developing the argument further. I would still be at something of a loss to understand the editorial’s relationship to ethics in science and engineering, but I might have been more willing to grant the author his prerogative—particularly given his fondness for markets and private enterprise.

Ethics viewpoints efficacies

Seeking answers to ethical concerns.

The ethics beat

Surveying the increasing variety and nature of ethical challenges encountered by computing researchers and practitioners.