Journal of responsible technology最新文献

{"title":"From thanabots to responsible DeathTech: An ethical–socio-pedagogical framework for AI and digital grief support","authors":"Santolo Ciccarelli,&nbsp;Giulia Levi,&nbsp;Maria Luisa Iavarone,&nbsp;Francesco Vincenzo Ferraro","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100184","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100184","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This discussion paper examines the ethical, pedagogical and social challenges posed by emerging DeathTech practices, particularly AI-driven thanabots that simulate posthumous interactions with the deceased. While these systems promise comfort, recent evidence highlights risks of hyper-attachment, emotional distortion, and the disruption of healthy mourning processes. Drawing on embodied cognition, meaningful play, and immersive learning environments, the authors propose an educationally grounded alternative that restores the bodily, relational, and symbolic dimensions of grief. Integrating findings from clinical interventions (3MDR), virtual-reality grief therapies (EMMA), and AI-mediated Holocaust testimony, the authors outline a theoretical and methodological framework for responsible grief support that rejects the simulation of the deceased in favour of reflective, non-representational digital experiences. Anchored in GDPR, the AI Act, and Responsible Research and Innovation, the model offers guidelines for designing technologies that enhance emotional literacy, ethical awareness, and critical engagement with digital mortality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"27 ","pages":"Article 100184"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148934758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"AGI for healthcare? A call for conceptual discipline in the European Union","authors":"Bernd Carsten Stahl,&nbsp;Damian Okaibedi Eke","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100183","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100183","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The European Commission has recently launched a call for proposals on the topic of artificial general intelligence (AGI) for healthcare. In this editorial we discuss possible interpretations and implications of such a call. It explores the different meanings and discourses around AGI and concludes that it is a contested term that may be linked to significant risks and harms. We then look at how the EU has traditionally dealt with significant but unquantifiable risks using the precautionary principle and how it current aims to deal with risks of AI, focusing on the EU AI Act. We conclude that the use of the term AGI in the call is fundamentally problematic. It may stand for advanced AI technology, in which case there is no need to use such a contested term. Alternatively, it refers to qualitatively novel types of AI technologies with unpredictable capabilities. If this is the case, then it may raise significant risks and potential harms and funding work on it conflicts with the long-standing precautionary approach to such risks. Either way, we believe that increased attention to conceptual discipline would benefit the EU’s Horizon Europe research framework programme and European AI policy more broadly.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"27 ","pages":"Article 100183"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148994961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Assessing privacy risks of proprietary and open-weight large language models: A GDPR-oriented comparative analysis","authors":"Yehia Ibrahim Alzoubi,&nbsp;Alok Mishra","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100187","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100187","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study examines the growing privacy risks posed by Large Language Models (LLMs) through a structured, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)-oriented comparative analysis. As LLMs increasingly process personal data across sectors, understanding their alignment with the proposed GDPR-based evaluation dimensions is essential for responsible adoption and risk mitigation. Using a multi-criteria evaluation framework informed by the literature, six leading LLMs (GPT-4/5, Claude 3, Gemini, Llama 3, Mistral, and Falcon) were assessed across six GDPR-based evaluation dimensions. Weighted scoring enabled a transparent comparison of privacy governance maturity across the evaluated models. Findings indicate strong performance in security and risk-based controls, particularly among proprietary models, while notable gaps remain in Purpose Limitation, Data Minimization, and documentation of lawful bases. Proprietary models generally demonstrated higher privacy governance maturity, whereas open-weight models benefited from community scrutiny but lacked structured documentation and enterprise accountability. Data Subject Rights exhibited mixed support across all evaluated models, reflecting technical challenges in implementing access, rectification, and erasure within machine learning contexts. This study contributes an actionable framework for organizations, policymakers, and researchers seeking to align Artificial Intelligence (AI) deployment with GDPR requirements. Future research should focus on longitudinal assessments of evolving LLM policies, the development of AI-specific regulatory guidance to address ambiguities in the GDPR, and the creation of standardized benchmarks for evaluating privacy governance in foundation models.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"27 ","pages":"Article 100187"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148934690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Toward a Socratic Scaffolding design paradigm for diagnostic AI: A conceptual middleware framework","authors":"Savvas A. Chatzichristofis,&nbsp;Eleftheria Hatzimichael,&nbsp;Elena Kakoulli,&nbsp;Angelos Amanatiadis","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100185","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100185","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper introduces a conceptual middleware framework that reconfigures the epistemic dynamics of clinician–AI interaction in diagnostic contexts. Departing from automation-first paradigms, the proposed system delays the disclosure of AI-generated outputs until the clinician has articulated an initial diagnostic hypothesis. This inversion reinstates the human agent as the initiating epistemic authority and preserves interpretive sovereignty in the clinical reasoning process. Grounded in dialogic pedagogy and situated cognition, the framework scaffolds reflective inquiry through Socratic prompts, contextual cues, and guided deliberation. Drawing on Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development, Schön’s model of the reflective practitioner, and Suchman’s theory of situated action, it conceptualizes diagnosis as an interpretive and socially embedded activity, not reducible to computational prediction. Rather than reporting clinical outcome evidence or diagnostic performance results, the paper offers a philosophical counter-design that challenges the normative legitimacy of prediction-led interaction models. It engages critically with Dreyfus’s critique of disembodied expertise and Fricker’s notion of epistemic injustice, arguing that prevailing system architectures risk displacing clinicians’ epistemic agency and undermining responsibility attribution.</div><div>To probe workflow fit and surface practical constraints, we also conducted a small formative Wizard-of-Oz study using hematology morphology vignettes, in which clinicians experienced both an AI-first baseline and the proposed delayed-disclosure flow. We use the resulting qualitative feedback to derive mode-sensitive design requirements (for example, prompt budgets, bypass and escalation logic, and logging boundaries), rather than to make diagnostic performance claims.</div><div>While aligned with ethical frameworks from UNESCO, WHO, and the OECD, the contribution lies in embedding these normative commitments into the temporal and interactional structure of AI use. The proposal thus reframes diagnostic AI not as an autonomous oracle, but as a dialogic partner in co-reasoning. By integrating epistemological theory, design philosophy, and ethical reflection, the paper contributes to current debates in the philosophy of AI and social epistemology, advancing a model of human–machine interaction grounded in interpretive integrity and professional judgment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"27 ","pages":"Article 100185"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148934689","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Frontiers of thanabots as DeathTech: Transgressive acts, politics and activism, and emerging professions","authors":"Joshua Hurtado Hurtado","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100176","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100176","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Digital replicas of the dead, often called thanabots, are increasingly used for purposes beyond dealing with grief. The advent of generative artificial intelligence technologies and the continued attempts by technology companies to digitally recreate the dead demand increasing awareness of the potential benefits and risks of thanabots. In this article, I ask: in what ways can thanabots be used beyond dealing with grief? And how can ethical and governance principles help orient their responsible use? Inspired by a Futures Studies approach and drawing on data from nine semi-structured interviews, I describe three frontiers of thanabots as DeathTech that show novel ways in which people can engage with thanabots beyond a focus on grief. These frontiers are transgressive acts, politics and activism, and emerging professions. I discuss the ethical and social significance of the three frontiers and propose several principles to inform the development of ethical and governance frameworks of this technology. Though mostly speculative, the three frontiers and the corresponding principles contribute to ongoing conversations on the responsible development of DeathTech.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148178528","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Erratum to ‘What's left of responsible innovation after Gaza? Ecocide, epistemicide, and genocide in occupied Palestine’ [Journal of Responsible Technology Volume 23, September 2025, 100132]","authors":"Mario Pansera","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2025.100146","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2025.100146","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100146"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148553980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Opaque procurement: How transparency deficits compromise democratic digital sovereignty","authors":"Bart Anthony Kamphorst ,&nbsp;Sofie de Wilde de Ligny ,&nbsp;Fabian Ferrari ,&nbsp;Mirko Tobias Schäfer","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100178","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100178","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>While digital sovereignty has quickly become a European policy mantra, few public institutions in Europe possess a clear view of their actual technological dependencies on proprietary infrastructure and non-European providers of data and AI products and services. This lack of insight not only risks turning calls for more sovereignty into hollow slogans but also frustrates the responsible governance of digital technologies. This article argues that opaque procurement practices contribute to the persistence of the problem. Without knowing what is bought, from whom, and under what terms, public institutions are restricted in exercising effective control and cannot adequately plan for and use suitable alternatives. Moreover, without meaningful mechanisms of transparency about procurement, researchers, critical members of the public, and journalists are denied access to necessary resources for democratic contestation and holding public institutions accountable. Building on previous research in the Netherlands, the article uses the Dutch public sector as a case study to show how an opaque procurement ecosystem may undermine democratic digital sovereignty ambitions. To improve the situation, the article outlines strategies for making the procurement of data and AI products and services more transparent.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100178"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148230721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Principles of consent and non-addiction in AI grief bots","authors":"Kwan Yiu Cheng","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100177","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100177","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article proposes that the principles of consent and non-addiction are central to the responsible and safe use of AI grief bots. The article begins by answering the questions of what a grief bot is, how grief bots operate and how grief bot businesses generate profit. It sets out the practical categories of grief bots and explains how AI grief bots fit within the concepts of death technology and grief technology. First, the article suggests that AI grief bots must operate in accordance with the principle of consent. This requires consent to the creation, use and deletion of the AI grief bot, as well as consent to the use of the deceased’s portrait rights and personal information, so that the applications operate responsibly towards the deceased and those affected by their use. Second, the article advances the principle of non-addiction in relation to AI grief bots. This principle requires that grief bots are implemented with safeguards so that they do not produce unhealthy emotional dependency or compulsive attachment. It requires faithful use of input data, interventions such as consistent warnings and, more generally, clear labelling. Closely connected to non-addiction is the principle of non-manipulation, which requires that the system does not actively encourage excessive reliance or compulsive use that interferes with healthy grieving and ordinary daily life. Finally, particular concerns arise regarding the capacity of children to provide informed consent in relation to grief bots, and additional safeguards are therefore necessary, including parental or guardian accompaniment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100177"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148178527","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A care-centred approach for responsible design and use of AI-enabled digital technologies for dying and death","authors":"Richard Green","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100174","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100174","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) powered technologies, such as chatbots and ambient intelligence technologies, into processes of dying and death introduces both new opportunities and ethical challenges. These technologies have the potential to support communication between those who are dying and those around them in a range a ways, particularly for important work in anticipatory and advance care planning, and bereavement processes. Yet, their capacity to simulate empathy, capture intimate conversations, and persist beyond death raises profound questions about autonomy, authenticity, consent, and the moral boundaries of digital companionship. This conceptual paper examines the ethical considerations of deploying some of these technologies in PEOLC, drawing on principles of feminist ethics of care and responsible research and innovation to explore tensions between technological promise and human vulnerability. From this a care-centred approach to governance of dying and death technologies is proposed that prioritises transparency, cultural sensitivity, and relational ethics in designing and governing digital technology systems in this area.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148178530","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Coded Ethics: Decision-Making and the Responsible Development of Automated Digital Technologies","authors":"Danielle Shanley,&nbsp;Tricia Griffin","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100155","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100155","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100155"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148285174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}