Advertisement

Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 1097–1110 | Cite as

Agreeing in Ignorance: Mapping the Routinisation of Consent in ICT-Services

  • Thomas PlougEmail author
  • Søren Holm
Original Paper

Abstract

Many ICT services require that users explicitly consent to conditions of use and policies for the protection of personal information. This consent may become ‘routinised’. We define the concept of routinisation and investigate to what extent routinisation occurs as well as the factors influencing routinisation in a survey study of internet use. We show that routinisation is common and that it is influenced by factors including gender, age, educational level and average daily internet use. We further explore the reasons users provide for not reading conditions and policies and show that they can be grouped in meaningful ways that may delineate different types of routinsation.

Keywords

Autonomy ICT Informed consent Routinisation 

References

  1. Altman, D. G. (1991). Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Bakos, Y., Marotta-Wurgler, F., Trossen, D. R. (2009). Does anyone read the fine print? Testing a law and economics approach to standard form contracts. CELS 2009 4th annual conference on empirical legal studies paper. NYU Law and Economics Research Paper No. 09-40.Google Scholar
  3. Dworkin, G. (1989). The concept of autonomy. In J. Christman (Ed.), The inner citadel—essays in individual autonomy (pp. 54–62). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Faden, R. R., & Beauchamp, T. (1986). A history and theory of informed consent. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Feinberg, J. (1989). Autonomy. In J. Christman (Ed.), The inner citadel—essays in individual autonomy (pp. 27–53). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Frankfurt, H. (1989). Freedom of the will and the concept of a person. In J. Christman (Ed.), The inner citadel—essays in individual autonomy (pp. 63–76). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Fried, C. (1970). An anatomy of values. Harvard: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kant, I. (1997). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Mann, R. T., & Siebeneicher, T. (2008). Just one click: The reality of internet retail contracting. Columbia Law Review, 108(4), 984–1012.Google Scholar
  10. Nielsen, L. D. (2013) Facebook statistik 2013 for Danmark: Sådan er befolkningen fordelt. http://www.nettendenser.dk/2013/01/25/facebook-statistik-2013-for-danmark-sadan-er-befolkningen-fordelt/.
  11. Ploug, T., & Holm, S. (2012). Informed consent and routinisation. Journal of Medical Ethics,. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-101056.Google Scholar
  12. Ploug, T., & Holm S Pharmaceutical information systems and possible implementations of informed consent—developing an heuristic. BMC Medical Ethics, doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-13-30.
  13. Rachels, J. (1975). Why privacy is important. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 4(4), 323–333.Google Scholar
  14. Schoeman, F. D. (1992). Privacy and social freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communication, Centre for Applied Ethics and Philosophy of ScienceAalborg University CopenhagenCopenhagen SVDenmark
  2. 2.Centre for Social Ethics and Policy, School of LawUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK
  3. 3.Faculty of Medicine, Center for Medical EthicsUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  4. 4.Centre for Applied EthicsAalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations