Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems

  • Batya Friedman
  • Peter H. KahnJr.
  • Alan Borning
  • Alina Huldtgren
Chapter
Part of the Philosophy of Engineering and Technology book series (POET, volume 16)

Abstract

Value Sensitive Design is a theoretically grounded approach to the design of technology that accounts for human values in a principled and comprehensive manner throughout the design process. It employs an integrative and iterative tripartite methodology, consisting of conceptual, empirical, and technical investigations. We explicate Value Sensitive Design by drawing on three case studies. The first study concerns information and control of web browser cookies, implicating the value of informed consent. The second study concerns using high-definition plasma displays in an office environment to provide a “window” to the outside world, implicating the values of physical and psychological well-being and privacy in public spaces. The third study concerns an integrated land use, transportation, and environmental simulation system to support public deliberation and debate on major land use and transportation decisions, implicating the values of fairness, accountability, and support for the democratic process, as well as a highly diverse range of values that might be held by different stakeholders, such as environmental sustainability, opportunities for business expansion, or walkable neighborhoods. We conclude with direct and practical suggestions for how to engage in Value Sensitive Design.

The original version of this chapter is published by M.E. Sharpe (www.mesharpe.com). This chapter contains a reprint of the original paper with an additional commentary.

Keywords

Transportation Expense Arena Stake Metaphor 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Value Sensitive Design has emerged over the past decade and benefited from discussions with many people. We would like particularly to acknowledge all the members of our respective research groups, along with Edward Felten, Jonathan Grudin, Sara Kiesler, Clifford Nass, Helen Nissenbaum, John Thomas, and Terry Winograd. This research was supported in part by NSF Awards IIS-9911185, IIS-0325035, EIA-0121326, and EIA-0090832.

Notes The Oxford English Dictionary definition of this sense of value is: “the principles or standards of a person or society, the personal or societal judgement of what is valuable and important in life” (Simpson and Wiener 1989).

References

  1. Aberg, J., & Shahmehri, N. (2001). An empirical study of human web assistants: Implications for user support in Web information systems. In Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2000) (pp. 404–411). New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ackerman, M. S., & Cranor, L. (1999). Privacy critics: UI components to safeguard users’ privacy. In Extended abstracts of CHI 1999 (pp. 258–259). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  3. Adler, P. S., & Winograd, T. (Eds.). (1992). Usability: Turning technologies into tools. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Agre, P. E., & Rotenberg, M. (Eds.). (1998). Technology and privacy: The new landscape. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Baier, A. (1986). Trust and antitrust. Ethics, 92, 231–260.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, A., & Katcher, A. (1996). Between pets and people. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Becker, L. C. (1977). Property rights: Philosophical foundations. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  8. Bellotti, V. (1998). Design for privacy in multimedia computing and communications environments. In P. E. Agre & M. Rotenberg (Eds.), Technology and privacy: The new landscape (pp. 63–98). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bennet, W. J., & Delatree, E. J. (1978). Moral education in the schools. The Public Interest, 50, 81–98.Google Scholar
  10. Bers, M. U., Gonzalez-Heydrich, J., & DeMaso, D. R. (2001). Identity construction environments: Supporting a virtual therapeutic community of pediatric patients undergoing dialysis. In Proceedings of the conference of human factors in computing systems (CHI 2001) (pp. 380–387). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
  11. Bjerknes, G., & Bratteteig, T. (1995). User participation and democracy: A discussion of Scandinavian research on system development. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 7(1), 73–97.Google Scholar
  12. Bødker, S. (1990). Through the interface – A human activity approach to user interface design. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  13. Borning, A., Friedman, B., Davis, J., & Lin, P. (2005, January). Informing public deliberation: Value sensitive design of indicators for a large-scale urban simulation. In ECSCW 2005 (pp. 449–468). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Borning, A., Waddell, P., & Förster, R. (2008). UrbanSim: Using simulation to inform public deliberation and decision-making. In Digital government (pp. 439–464). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Boyle, M., Edwards, C., & Greenberg, S. (2000). The effects of filtered video on awareness and privacy. In Proceedings of conference on computer supported cooperative work (CSCW 2000) (pp. 1–10). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
  16. Bynum, T. W. (Ed.). (1985). Metaphilosophy, 16(4), 263–377. [Entire issue.]Google Scholar
  17. Camp, L. J. (2000). Trust & risk in internet commerce. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Campbell, R. L., & Christopher, J. C. (1996). Moral development theory: A critique of its Kantian presuppositions. Developmental Review, 16, 1–47.Google Scholar
  19. Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2006). Dimensions of participation in information system design. In P. Zhang & D. Galletta (Eds.), Human-computer interaction and management information systems: Applications (Advances in management information systems, pp. 337–354). Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  20. Cooper, M., & Rejmer, P. (2001). Case study: Localization of an accessibility evaluation. In Extended abstracts of the conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2001) (pp. 141–142). New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  21. Davis, J. (2006, August). Value sensitive design of interactions with UrbanSim indicators. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Computer Science & Engineering, University of Washington.Google Scholar
  22. Dieberger, A., Hook, K., Svensson, M., & Lonnqvist, P. (2001). Social navigation research agenda. In Extended abstracts of the conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2001) (pp. 107–108). New York: Association of Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  23. Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking rights seriously. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Egger, F. N. (2000). “Trust me, I’m an online vendor”: Towards a model of trust for e-commerce system design. In Extended abstracts of the conference of human factors in computing systems (CHI 2000) (pp. 101–102). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
  25. Ehn, P. (1989). Work-oriented design of computer artifacts. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Faden, R., & Beauchamp, T. (1986). A history and theory of informed consent. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Federal Trade Commission. (2000, May). Privacy online: Fair information practices in the electronic marketplace. A Report to Congress. Washington, DC: Federal Trade Commission.Google Scholar
  28. Fogg, B. J., & Tseng, H. (1999). The elements of computer credibility. In Proceedings of CHI 1999 (pp. 80–87). Cambridge, MA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  29. Foot, P. (1978). Virtues and vices. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  30. Frankena, W. (1972). Value and valuation. In P. Edwards (Ed.), The encyclopedia of philosophy (Vol. 7–8, pp. 409–410). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  31. Franklin, J., Waddell, P., & Britting, J. (2002, November 21–24). Sensitivity analysis approach for an Integrated Land Development & Travel Demand Modeling System. Presented at the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning 44th annual conference, Baltimore. Preprint available from www.urbansim.org
  32. Freeman-Benson, B. N., & Borning, A. (2003, June). YP and urban simulation: Applying an agile programming methodology in a politically tempestuous domain. In Proceedings of the 2003 Agile Programming Conference, Salt Lake City. Preprint available from www.urbansim.org
  33. Friedman, B. (Ed.). (1997a). Human values and the design of computer technology. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Friedman, B. (1997b). Social judgments and technological innovation: Adolescents’ understanding of property, privacy, and electronic information. Computers in Human Behavior, 13(3), 327–351.Google Scholar
  35. Friedman, B., & Kahn, P. H., Jr. (1992). Human agency and responsible computing: Implications for computer system design. Journal of Systems Software, 17, 7–14.Google Scholar
  36. Friedman, B., & Kahn, P. H., Jr. (2003). Human values, ethics, and design. In J. Jacko & A. Sears (Eds.), The human-computer interaction handbook. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  37. Friedman, B., & Millett, L. (1995). “It’s the computer’s fault” – Reasoning about computers as moral agents. In Conference companion of the conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 95) (pp. 226–227). New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  38. Friedman, B., & Nissenbaum, H. (1996). Bias in computer systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 14(3), 330–347.Google Scholar
  39. Friedman, B., & Nissenbaum, H. (1997). Software agents and user autonomy. In Proceedings of the first international conference on autonomous agents (pp. 466–469). New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  40. Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H., Jr., & Howe, D. C. (2000a). Trust online. Communications of the ACM, 43(12), 34–40.Google Scholar
  41. Friedman, B., Millett, L., & Felten, E. (2000b). Informed consent online: A conceptual model and design principles. University of Washington Computer Science & Engineering Technical Report 00-12-2.Google Scholar
  42. Friedman, B., Howe, D. C., & Felten, E. (2002, January). Informed consent in the Mozilla browser: Implementing value-sensitive design. In HICSS. Proceedings of the 35th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 2002 (pp. 247–257). IEEE.Google Scholar
  43. Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H., Jr., & Hagman, J. (2003). Hardware companions?: What online AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship. In Conference proceedings of CHI 2003 (pp. 273–280). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  44. Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H., Jr., Hagman, J., Severson, R. L., & Gill, B. (2006). The watcher and the watched: Social judgments about privacy in a public place. Human-Computer Interaction, 21(2), 235–272.Google Scholar
  45. Fuchs, L. (1999). AREA: A cross-application notification service for groupware. In Proceedings of ECSCW 1999 (pp. 61–80). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  46. Galegher, J., Kraut, R. E., & Egido, C. (Eds.). (1990). Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  47. Gallopin, G. C. (1997). Indicators and their use: Information for decision-making. In B. Moldan, S. Billharz, & R. Matravers (Eds.), Sustainability indicators: A report on the project on indicators of sustainable development. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  48. Gewirth, A. (1978). Reason and morality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  49. Greenbaum, J., & Kyng, M. (Eds.). (1991). Design at work: Cooperative design of computer systems. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  50. Grudin, J. (1988). Why CSCW applications fail: Problems in the design and evaluation of organizational interfaces. In Proceedings of the conference on computer supported cooperative work (CSCW ‘88) (pp. 85–93). New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  51. Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the evolution of society (trans: McCarthy, T.). Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  52. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action, Vol 1. (trans: McCarthy, T.). Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  53. Hagman, J., Hendrickson, A., & Whitty, A. (2003). What’s in a barcode: Informed consent and machine scannable driver licenses. In CHI 2003 extended abstracts of the conference on human factors in computing system (pp. 912–913). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  54. Harris Poll/Business Week. (2000). A growing threat. http://www.buisnessweek.come/2000/00_12/b3673010.htmGoogle Scholar
  55. Hart, M. (1999). Guide to sustainable community indicators. Hart Environmental Data, PO Box 361, North Andover, MA 01845, second edition.Google Scholar
  56. Herskovits, M. J. (1952). Economic anthropology: A study of comparative economics. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  57. Hill, T. E., Jr. (1991). Autonomy and self-respect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Isaacs, E. A., Tang, J. C., & Morris, T. (1996). Piazza: A desktop environment supporting impromptu and planned interactions. In Proceedings of the conference on computer supported cooperative work (CSCW 96) (pp. 315–324). New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  59. Jacko, J. A., Dixon, M. A., Rosa, R. H., Jr., Scott, I. U., & Pappas, C. J. (1999). Visual profiles: A critical component of universal access. In Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 99) (pp. 330–337). New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  60. Jancke, G., Venolia, G. D., Grudin, J., Cadiz, J. J., & Gupta, A. (2001). Linking public spaces: Technical and social issues. In Proceedings of CHI 2001 (pp. 530–537). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  61. Johnson, E. H. (2000). Getting beyond the simple assumptions of organization impact [social informatics]. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, 26(3), 18–19.Google Scholar
  62. Johnson, D. G., & Miller, K. (1997). Ethical issues for computer scientists and engineers. In A. B. Tucker, Jr. (Ed.-in-Chief), The computer science and engineering handbook (pp. 16–26). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  63. Kahn, P. H., Jr. (1999). The human relationship with nature: Development and culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  64. Kahn, P. H., Jr., & Kellert, S. R. (Eds.). (2002). Children and nature: Psychological, sociocultural, and evolutionary investigations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  65. Kahn, P. H., Jr., & Turiel, E. (1988). Children’s conceptions of trust in the context of social expectations. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 34, 403–419.Google Scholar
  66. Kant, I. (1964). Groundwork of the metaphysic of morals (trans: Paton, H. J.). New York: Harper Torchbooks. (Original work published 1785.)Google Scholar
  67. Kling, R., & Star, S. L. (1998). Human centered systems in the perspective of organizational and social informatics. Computers and Society, 28(1), 22–29.Google Scholar
  68. Kling, R., Rosenbaum, H., & Hert, C. (1998). Social informatics in information science: An introduction. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(12), 1047–1052.Google Scholar
  69. Kyng, M., & Mathiassen, L. (Eds.). (1997). Computers and design in context. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  70. Leveson, N. G. (1991). Software safety in embedded computer systems. Communications of the ACM, 34(2), 34–46.Google Scholar
  71. Lipinski, T. A., & Britz, J. J. (2000). Rethinking the ownership of information in the 21st century: Ethical implications. Ethics and Information Technology, 2(1), 49–71.Google Scholar
  72. MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  73. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.Google Scholar
  74. Millett, L., Friedman, B., & Felten, E. (2001). Cookies and web browser design: Toward realizing informed consent online. In Proceedings of CHI 2001 (pp. 46–52). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  75. Moldan, B., Billharz, S., & Matravers, R. (Eds.). (1997). Sustainability indicators: A report on the project on indicators of sustainable development. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  76. Moore, G. E. (1978). Principia ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1903).Google Scholar
  77. Nass, C., & Gong, L. (2000). Speech interfaces from an evolutionary perspective. Communications of the ACM, 43(9), 36–43.Google Scholar
  78. Neumann, P. G. (1995). Computer related risks. New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  79. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. Boston: AP Professional.Google Scholar
  80. Nissenbaum, H. (1998). Protecting privacy in an information age: The problem with privacy in public. Law and Philosophy, 17, 559–596.Google Scholar
  81. Nissenbaum, H. (1999). Can trust be secured online? A theoretical perspective. Etica e Politca, 2 (Electronic journal).Google Scholar
  82. Nissenbaum, H. (2001). Securing trust online: Wisdom or oxymoron. Boston University Law Review, 81(3), 635–664.Google Scholar
  83. Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  84. Northwest Environment Watch (2002). This place on earth 2002: Measuring what matters. Northwest Environment Watch, 1402 Third Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.Google Scholar
  85. Noth, M., Borning, A., & Waddell, P. (2003). An extensible, modular architecture for simulating urban development, transportation, and environmental impacts. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 27(2), 181–203.Google Scholar
  86. Olson, J. S., & Olson, G. M. (2000). i2i trust in e-commerce. Communications of the ACM, 43(12), 41–44.Google Scholar
  87. Olson, J. S., & Teasley, S. (1996). Groupware in the wild: Lessons learned from a year of virtual collaboration. In Proceedings of the conference on computer supported cooperative work (CSCW 96) (pp. 419–427). New York: Association for Computing Machinery Press.Google Scholar
  88. Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Research commentary: Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research—a call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 121–134.Google Scholar
  89. Palen, L., & Dourish, P. (2003). Privacy and trust: Unpacking “privacy” for a networked world. In Proceedings of CHI 2003 (pp. 129–136). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  90. Palen, L., & Grudin, J. (2003). Discretionary adoption of group support software: Lessons from calendar applications. In B. E. Munkvold (Ed.), Implementing collaboration technologies in industry. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  91. Palmer, K. (Ed.). (1998). Indicators of sustainable community. Seattle: Sustainable Seattle.Google Scholar
  92. Phillips, D. J. (1998). Cryptography, secrets, and structuring of trust. In P. E. Agre & M. Rotenberg (Eds.), Technology and privacy: The new landscape (pp. 243–276). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  93. Pruitt, J., & Grudin, J. (2003). Personas: Practice and theory. In Proceedings of DUX 2003. Cambridge, MA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  94. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York/Stanford: Cambridge University Press/CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  96. Riegelsberger, J., & Sasse, M. A. (2002). Face it – Photos don’t make a web site trustworthy. In Extended abstracts of CHI 2002 (pp. 742–743). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  97. Rocco, E. (1998). Trust breaks down in electronic contexts but can be repaired by some initial face-to-face contact. In Proceedings of CHI 1998 (pp. 496–502). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  98. Rosenberg, S. (1997). Multiplicity of selves. In R. D. Ashmore & L. Jussim (Eds.), Self and identity: Fundamental issues (pp. 23–45). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  99. Sawyer, S., & Rosenbaum, H. (2000). Social informatics in the information sciences: Current activities and emerging direction. Informing Science, 3(2), 89–95.Google Scholar
  100. Scheffler, S. (1982). The rejection of consequentialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  101. Schiano, D. J., & White, S. (1998). The first noble truth of cyberspace: People are people (even when they MOO). In Proceedings of the conference of human factors in computing systems (CHI 98) (pp. 352–359). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
  102. Schneider, F. B. (Ed.). (1999). Trust in cyberspace. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  103. Schoeman, F. D. (Ed.). (1984). Philosophical dimensions of privacy: An anthology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  104. Schwartzman, Y., & Borning, A. (2007, January). The indicator browser: A web-based interface for visualizing UrbanSim simulation results. In HICSS 2007. 40th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 2007 (pp. 92–92). IEEE.Google Scholar
  105. Shneiderman, B. (1999). Universal usability: Pushing human-computer interaction research to empower every citizen (ISR Technical Report 99–72). College Park: University of Maryland, Institute for Systems Research.Google Scholar
  106. Shneiderman, B. (2000). Universal usability. Communications of the ACM, 43(5), 84–91.Google Scholar
  107. Simpson, J. A., & Weiner, E. S. C. (Eds.). (1989). “value, n.” Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989. OED Online. Oxford University Press. 30 May 2003. http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/00274678
  108. Smart, J. J. C., & Williams, B. (1973). Utilitarianism for and against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  109. Stephanidis, C. (Ed.). (2001). User interfaces for all: Concepts, methods, and tools. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  110. Suchman, L. (1994). Do categories have politics? The language/action perspective reconsidered. CSCW Journal, 2(3), 177–190.Google Scholar
  111. Svensson, M., Hook, K., Laaksolahti, J., & Waern, A. (2001). Social navigation of food recipes. In Proceedings of the conference of human factors in computing systems (CHI 2001) (pp. 341–348). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
  112. Tang, J. C. (1997). Eliminating a hardware switch: Weighing economics and values in a design decision. In B. Friedman (Ed.), Human values and the design of computer technology (pp. 259–269). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  113. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. (1978). The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research.Google Scholar
  114. Thomas, J. C. (1997). Steps toward universal access within a communications company. In B. Friedman (Ed.), Human values and the design of computer technology (pp. 271–287). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  115. Turiel, E. (1983). The development of social knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  116. Turiel, E. (1998). Moral development. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Social, emotional, and personality development (Vol. 3 of W. Damon, Ed., Handbook of child psychology. 5th ed. pp. 863–932). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  117. Turiel, E. (2002). The culture of morality: Social development, context, and conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  118. Turkle, S. (1996). Life on the screen: Identify in the age of the internet. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  119. Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science, 224, 420–421.Google Scholar
  120. Ulrich, R. S. (1993). Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In S. R. Kellert & E. O. Wilson (Eds.), The biophilia hypothesis (pp. 73–137). Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  121. United Nations (2002). Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1992. Available from http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21toc.htm
  122. Waddell, P. (2002). UrbanSim: Modeling urban development for land use, transportation, and environmental planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68(3), 297–314.Google Scholar
  123. Waddell, P., Borning, A., Noth, M., Freier, N., Becke, M., & Ulfarsson, G. (2003). Microsimulation of urban development and location choices: Design and implementation of UrbanSim. Networks and Spatial Economics, 3(1), 43–67.Google Scholar
  124. Weiser, M., & Brown, J. S. (1997). The coming age of calm technology. In P. Denning & B. Metcalfe (Eds.), Beyond calculation: The next 50 years of computing (pp. 75–85). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  125. Weizenbaum, J. (1972). On the impact of the computer on society: How does one insult a machine? Science, 178, 609–614.Google Scholar
  126. Wiener, N. (1985). The machine as threat and promise. In P. Masani (Ed.), Norbert wiener: Collected works and commentaries (Vol. IV, pp. 673–678). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Reprinted from St. Louis Post Dispatch, 1953, December 13.).Google Scholar
  127. Winograd, T. (1994). Categories, disciplines, and social coordination. CSCW Journal, 2(3), 191–197.Google Scholar
  128. World Commission on Environment and Development (Gro Harlem Brundtland, Chair). (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  129. Wynne, E. A., & Ryan, K. (1993). Reclaiming our schools: A handbook on teaching character, academics, and discipline. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  130. Zheng, J., Bos, N., Olson, J., & Olson, G. M. (2001). Trust without touch: Jump-start trust with social chat. In Extended abstracts of CHI 2001 (pp. 293–294). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Batya Friedman
    • 1
  • Peter H. KahnJr.
    • 2
  • Alan Borning
    • 3
  • Alina Huldtgren
    • 4
  1. 1.Information SchoolUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  4. 4.Duesseldorf University of Applied SciencesDuesseldorfGermany

Personalised recommendations