Shadow footprints and the provision of digital behavioral data
A digital civics perspective on psychology research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33621/jdsr.v6i3.33352Keywords:
data privacy, information ethics, informed consent, surveillance capitalism, Belmont, digital civicsAbstract
We introduce the concept of shadow footprints as a means of understanding privacy challenges in the information environment. Growing emphasis on the impact of citizens sharing their personal data goes far beyond the individual, with the increased capacity of algorithms to formulate shadow footprints that inform as much about persons absent from data, as persons present. Data extrapolated from small groups have demonstrated robust utility when applied to larger populations. Individuals who have opted to keep their data private, or who have been unaware that data about their private lives has been extracted from the involvement of their fellow citizens from digital behavioral data, suggest the possibility that informed consent has been circumvented, or not fully investigated. This is increasingly concerning when one considers the potential to impact the body politic through behavioral manipulation drawn from such data. These issues must be considered in the context of ethical and litigious standards to inform robust policy frameworks, legal regulation, and the provision of incentives necessary to provide guidance and civic protections, as well as adherence to good ethical practice.
References
Acquisti, A., & Gross, R. (2006). Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on Facebook. PET 2006. https://privacy.cs.cmu.edu
APA. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2002, amended 2017) https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/ethics-code-2017.pdf
American Psychologial Association: http://apa.org/ethics/code/index.html
Banker, S., Dunfield, D., Huang, A., & Prelec, D. (2021). Neural mechanisms of credit card spending. Scientific Reports, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83488-3
Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. (1978). National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. [Bethesda, Md.]: The Commission. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html
Bradshaw, S., Bailey, H., Howard, P. (2021). Industrialized Disinformation: 2020 Global Inventory of Organized Social Media Manipulation. Oxford, UK: Programme on Democracy & Technology. https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/127/2021/02/CyberTroop-Report20-Draft9.pdf
Chen, Y., Argentinis, JD., Weber, G., (2016). IBM Watson: How Cognitive Computing Can Be Applied to Big Data Challenges in Life Sciences Research. Clinical Therapeutics, 38(4), p.688-701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2015.12.001
Christian, K., Johnstone, C., Larkins, J., Wright, W. (2022). Seeking Approval from Universities to Research the Views of Their Staff. Do Gatekeepers Provide a Barrier to Ethical Research? Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 17(3), p. 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211068316
Clements, E. (2023). Exploring Digital Civics: a Framework of Key Concepts to Guide Digital Civics Initiatives. Philosophy & Technology, 36(2), 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00614-x
Clements, E. (2022a). Theuth, Thamus, and digital civics: Plato’s formulation of memory and its lessons for civic life in the digital age. Memory Studies, 15(4), 767-783. https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980221094516
Clements, E. (2022). Asking Dorian Gray for a Digital Civics Education. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 23(2). https://literacyandtechnologyorg.files.wordpress.com/2023/08/jlt_v23_2_clements.pdf
Clements, E. (2020a). A conceptual framework for digital civics pedagogy informed by the philosophy of information. Journal of Documentation, 76(2), 571-585. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-07-2019-0139
Clements, E. (2020b). Tech, Ethics, and the Digital Citizen. Geoscientist, 30(10), 16-17. https://doi.org/10.1144/geosci2020-116
Clements, E. (2017). Digital Civics in Pedagogy: A Response to the Challenges of Digital Convergence in the Educational Environment. Doctoral thesis, Dublin Institute of Technology. https://doi.org/10.21427/D7J45F
Cohen, J. (2019). Between Truth and Power: The legal Constructions of Informational Capitalism. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190246693.001.0001
Costanza-Chock, S. (2018). Design justice, AI, and escape from the matrix of domination. Journal of Design and Science. https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/123083
Debatin, B., Lovejoy, J., Horn, A., Hughes, B. (2009). Facebook and Online Privacy: Attitudes, Behaviors, and Unintended Consequences, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 15(1), p. 83–108, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01494.x
Dwyer, C., Hiltz, S. R., & Passerini, K. (2007). Trust and privacy concern within social networking sites: A comparison of Facebook and MySpace,” Proceedings of AMCIS 2007, Keystone, Co. http://csis.pace.edu/~dwyer/research/DwyerAMCIS2007.pdf
Esposito, E. (2017). Algorithmic memory and the right to be forgotten on the web. Big Data & Society. Epub ahead of print 17 April. https://doi.org/10.1177/205395171770399
Ess, C. (2010). The Embodied Self in a Digital Age: Possibilities, Risks, and Prospects for a Pluralistic (democratic/liberal) Future? Nordicom Information, 32(2). https://www.nordicom.gu.se/sites/default/files/kapitel-pdf/319_10%20ess.pdf
Ess, C. (2007). Cybernetic Pluralism in an Emerging Global Information and Computer Ethics. International Review of Information Ethics. 7. https://doi.org/10.29173/irie11.
Farahany, N., Greely, H., Giattino, C. (2019). Part-revived pig brains raise slew of ethical quandaries. Nature. 568, p. 299-302.
https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-01168-9
Feest, U. (2022). Data quality, experimental artifacts, and the reactivity of the psychological subject matter. European Journal for the philosophy of science. 12, 13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-021-00443-9
Floridi, L. (2009). The information society and its philosophy. The Information Society 25(3): 153–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240902848583
Floridi, L. (2005). The ontological interpretation of informational privacy. Ethics and Information Technology 7: 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-006-0001-7
Floridi, L. (1999). Philosophy and Computing: An Introduction. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203015315
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish. London: Allen Lane.
Fox, (2022). Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard: Nearly 11% of Twitter accounts participating in discourse are fake. https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/johnny-depp-amber-heard-twitterfake-users
Garcia, D., Goel, M., Agrawal, A.K., Kumaraguru, P. (2018). Collective aspects of privacy in the Twitter social network. EPJ Data Sci. 7, 3. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-018-0130-3
Garcia D. (2017). Leaking privacy and shadow profiles in online social networks. Sci Adv. 4, 3(8):e1701172. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1701172
Govani, T., Pashley, H. (2005). Student awareness of the privacy implications when using Facebook. Carnegie Mellon. http://lorrie.cranor.org/courses/fa05/tubzhlp.pdf
Hao. K. (2020). We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google. Here's what it says. MIT Technology Review. December 4. https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/12/04/1013294/google-ai-ethics-research-paperforced-out-timnit-gebru/
Henderson, R., Walker, O. (2020). BlackRock’s black box: the technology hub of modern finance. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/5ba6f40e-4e4d-11ea-95a0-43d18ec715f5
ICO (2021). Introduction to Anonymisation: Draft anonymisation, pseudonymisation and privacy enhancing technologies guidance. Information Commissioner’s Office. UK. https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/consultations/2619862/anonymisation-intro-and-firstchapter.pdf
ICO (2012). Anonymisation: Managing Data Protection Risk Code of Practice. Information Commissioner’s Office. UK. https://ico.org.uk/media/1061/anonymisation-code.pdf
Jenkins, D., Quintana-Ascencio, P. (2020). A solution to minimum sample size for regressions. PloS One, 15(2), e0229345. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229345
Johannes N., Vuorre M., Przybylski A. (2021). Video game play is positively correlated with well-being. Royal Society Open Science. 8202049202049 http://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.202049
Obar, J.A, & Oeldorf-Hirsch, A. (2020). The biggest lie on the Internet: ignoring the privacy policies and terms of service policies of social networking services, Information, Communication & Society 23:1, 128-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1486870
Jones, H., & Soltren, J. H. (2005). Facebook: Threats to privacy. (White Paper.) https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/student-papers/fall05-papers/facebook.pdf
Kapczynski, A. (2020). The Law of Informational Capitalism. The Yale Law Journal. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/KapczynskiBookReview_iqh4qxtw.pdf
Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., Graepel, T. (2013). Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 110(15) p. 5802-5805. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218772110
Metzinger, T. (2019). Ethics Washing Machines Made in Europe. Tagesspiegel. (Translated from German by Safari).https://background.tagesspiegel.de/ethik-waschmaschinen-made-ineurope?__cf_chl_tk=q7b1e62R9K2q.nM4XVkygD2IUc3BWEKhyotYgtJ.DAA-1658848248-0gaNycGzNB70
Moss, E., Metcalf, J. (2019). The Ethical Dilemma at the Heart of Big Tech Companies. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/11/the-ethical-dilemma-at-the-heart-of-big-techcompanies
Nissenbaum, H. (2010). Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy and the Integrity of Social Life. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. http://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=8862
Needham, K., Baldwin, C. (2021). China’s gene giant harvests data from millions of women. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-china-bgi-dna/
Ong, W. (1982). Orality and Literacy, The Technologizing of the Word. London and New York: Methuen.
Politou, E, Alepis, E, Patsakis, C (2018). Forgetting personal data and revoking consent under the GDPR: challenges and proposed solutions. Journal of Cybersecurity 4(1): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/cybsec/tyy001
Raven, B.H. (2008). The Bases of Power and the Power/Interaction Model of Interpersonal Influence. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 8: 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15302415.2008.00159.x
Rea, S. (2022). Teaching and confronting digital extremism: contexts, challenges and opportunities. Information and Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-08-2021-0065
Richardson, R., Schultz, J., Crawford, K. (2019). Dirty Data, Bad Predictions: How Civil Rights Violations Impact Police Data, Predictive Policing Systems, and Justice. New York University Law Review. 94. p.192-233. https://www.nyulawreview.org/online-features/dirty-data-bad-predictions-how-civil-rights-violations-impact-police-data-predictive-policing-systems-and-justice/
Schliebs, M., Bailey, H., Bright, J., Howard, P. (2021). China’s Public Diplomacy Operations Understanding Engagement and Inauthentic Amplification of PRC Diplomats on Facebook and Twitter. Oxford, UK: Programme on Democracy & Technology. https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/127/2021/05/Chinas-Public-DiplomacyOperations-Dem.Tech-Working-Paper-2021.1-4.pdf
Sjöberg, M., Chen, H., Floréen, P., Koskela, M., Kuikkaniemi, K., Lehtiniemi, T., Peltonen, J. (2016). Digital me: Controlling and making sense of my digital footprint. In International Workshop on Symbiotic Interaction p. 155-167. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57753-1_14
Stern, P. (1997). The Rule of Wisdom and the Rule of Law in Plato’s Statesman. The American Political Science Review, 91(2), p. 264-276. https://doi.org/10.2307/2952355
Thompson, S. Warzel, C. (2019). Opinion: Twelve Million Phones, One Dataset, Zero Privacy. The Privacy Project. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/19/opinion/location-tracking-cell-phone.html
UNESCWA. (nd). Green Accounting. United Nations. https://archive.unescwa.org/greenaccounting?fbclid=IwAR2ypv0OoUNi2rHKj0Yd02QEGFTPzhMqC_pLoAdf8zU8IqKuvduuO3 UqC8w
Vanity Fair. (2022). What’s Really Driving the Memeing of the Johnny Depp–Amber Heard Trial? https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2022/05/whats-really-driving-the-memeing-of-the-johnnydepp-amber-heard-trial
Vice. (2022). The Queasy, Inevitable Johnny Depp Gold Rush Continues Downstream. https://www.vice.com/en/article/epxyn4/youtube-tiktok-johnny-depp-amber-heard-trial
Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The Ethics of Online Research (Advances in Research Ethics and Integrity, Vol. 2.) Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2398-601820180000002010
Xiong, Y., Ritchie, H., Gan, N. (2022). Nearly one billion people in China had their personal data leaked, and it's been online for more than a year. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/05/china/china-billion-people-data-leak-intl-hnk/index.html
Zakrzewski, C. (2022). Google deceived consumers about how it profits from their location data, attorneys general allege in lawsuits. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/01/24/google-location-data-ags-lawsuit/
Zuboff, S. (2019a). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for the Future at the New Frontier of Power. London: Profile Books.
Zuboff, S. (2019b). Written Testimony Submitted to The International Grand Committee on Big Data, Privacy, and Democracy, Ottawa. Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics (ETHI). (42-1) 152. House of Commons Canada.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Estelle Clements, Marcus Horwood
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
