Charting ethical tensions in multispecies technology research through beneficiary-epistemology space
Charting ethical tensions in multispecies technology research through beneficiary-epistemology space
While ethical challenges are widely discussed in HCI, far less is reported about the ethical processes that researchers routinely navigate. We reflect on a multispecies project that negotiated an especially complex ethical approval process. Cat Royale was an artist-led exploration of creating an artwork to engage audiences in exploring trust in autonomous systems. The artwork took the form of a robot that played with three cats. Gaining ethical approval required an extensive dialogue with three Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) covering computer science, veterinary science and animal welfare, raising tensions around the welfare of the cats, perceived benefits and appropriate methods, and reputational risk to the University. To reveal these tensions we introduce beneficiary-epistemology space, that makes explicit who benefits from research (humans or animals) and underlying epistemologies. Positioning projects and IRBs in this space can help clarify tensions and highlight opportunities to recruit additional expertise.
Animal Ethics, Animal-Computer Interaction, Art, Artist-led research, Epistemology, Ethical Review, IRB, Medical Science, Research Ethics, Veterinary-Science
1-15
Association for Computing Machinery
Benford, Steve
61c727be-1561-424d-a8ef-c6933d024630
Mancini, Clara
279a1afa-d86b-4aa2-b255-80b69b60efbb
Chamberlain, Alan
149451ce-cb1e-4a85-8544-2c18b0d1275e
Schneiders, Eike
9da80af0-1e27-4454-90e2-eb1abf7108bd
Castle-Green, Simon
7b9f8ff2-8fe0-4af4-9b12-b646ab793165
Fischer, Joel
a320ad79-0fb5-464b-9eac-f74918b5ea68
Kucukyilmaz, Ayse
72e66f4d-b330-4418-a166-f88a711ab84d
Salimbeni, Guido
8175e3b8-071f-4f6e-9b24-427c65098cbf
Ngo, Victor
eff7936a-b665-4e45-9533-559b44f732bc
Barnard, Pepita
bbeab098-c887-4f41-a4a1-2f26223e0b8b
Adams, Matt
2859aaa0-3fcc-4913-bd6f-f2e951d78ad9
Tandavanitj, Nick
524dcbd4-f575-46c9-8338-7666875560ce
Farr, Ju Row
ffaa0e00-ae37-46ad-8e45-b7f7c0e0f82c
11 May 2024
Benford, Steve
61c727be-1561-424d-a8ef-c6933d024630
Mancini, Clara
279a1afa-d86b-4aa2-b255-80b69b60efbb
Chamberlain, Alan
149451ce-cb1e-4a85-8544-2c18b0d1275e
Schneiders, Eike
9da80af0-1e27-4454-90e2-eb1abf7108bd
Castle-Green, Simon
7b9f8ff2-8fe0-4af4-9b12-b646ab793165
Fischer, Joel
a320ad79-0fb5-464b-9eac-f74918b5ea68
Kucukyilmaz, Ayse
72e66f4d-b330-4418-a166-f88a711ab84d
Salimbeni, Guido
8175e3b8-071f-4f6e-9b24-427c65098cbf
Ngo, Victor
eff7936a-b665-4e45-9533-559b44f732bc
Barnard, Pepita
bbeab098-c887-4f41-a4a1-2f26223e0b8b
Adams, Matt
2859aaa0-3fcc-4913-bd6f-f2e951d78ad9
Tandavanitj, Nick
524dcbd4-f575-46c9-8338-7666875560ce
Farr, Ju Row
ffaa0e00-ae37-46ad-8e45-b7f7c0e0f82c
Benford, Steve, Mancini, Clara, Chamberlain, Alan, Schneiders, Eike, Castle-Green, Simon, Fischer, Joel, Kucukyilmaz, Ayse, Salimbeni, Guido, Ngo, Victor, Barnard, Pepita, Adams, Matt, Tandavanitj, Nick and Farr, Ju Row
(2024)
Charting ethical tensions in multispecies technology research through beneficiary-epistemology space.
In CHI 2024 - Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Sytems.
Association for Computing Machinery.
.
(doi:10.1145/3613904.3641994).
Record type:
Conference or Workshop Item
(Paper)
Abstract
While ethical challenges are widely discussed in HCI, far less is reported about the ethical processes that researchers routinely navigate. We reflect on a multispecies project that negotiated an especially complex ethical approval process. Cat Royale was an artist-led exploration of creating an artwork to engage audiences in exploring trust in autonomous systems. The artwork took the form of a robot that played with three cats. Gaining ethical approval required an extensive dialogue with three Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) covering computer science, veterinary science and animal welfare, raising tensions around the welfare of the cats, perceived benefits and appropriate methods, and reputational risk to the University. To reveal these tensions we introduce beneficiary-epistemology space, that makes explicit who benefits from research (humans or animals) and underlying epistemologies. Positioning projects and IRBs in this space can help clarify tensions and highlight opportunities to recruit additional expertise.
Text
3613904.3641994
- Version of Record
More information
Published date: 11 May 2024
Additional Information:
Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Copyright held by the owner/author(s)
Venue - Dates:
2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Sytems, CHI 2024, , Hybrid, Honolulu, United States, 2024-05-11 - 2024-05-16
Keywords:
Animal Ethics, Animal-Computer Interaction, Art, Artist-led research, Epistemology, Ethical Review, IRB, Medical Science, Research Ethics, Veterinary-Science
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 494612
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/494612
PURE UUID: ab2875ec-4366-425f-a675-88897a0575ae
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 10 Oct 2024 17:06
Last modified: 11 Oct 2024 02:11
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Steve Benford
Author:
Clara Mancini
Author:
Alan Chamberlain
Author:
Eike Schneiders
Author:
Simon Castle-Green
Author:
Joel Fischer
Author:
Ayse Kucukyilmaz
Author:
Guido Salimbeni
Author:
Victor Ngo
Author:
Pepita Barnard
Author:
Matt Adams
Author:
Nick Tandavanitj
Author:
Ju Row Farr
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics