来自下面的数据拒绝:一个理解、评估和设想拒绝作为设计的框架

Jonathan Zong, J. Nathan Matias
{"title":"来自下面的数据拒绝:一个理解、评估和设想拒绝作为设计的框架","authors":"Jonathan Zong, J. Nathan Matias","doi":"10.1145/3630107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Amidst calls for public accountability over large data-driven systems, feminist and indigenous scholars have developed refusal as a practice that challenges the authority of data collectors. However, because data affects so many aspects of daily life, it can be hard to see seemingly different refusal strategies as part of the same repertoire. Furthermore, conversations about refusal often happen from the standpoint of designers and policymakers rather than the people and communities most affected by data collection. In this paper, we introduce a framework for data refusal from below —writing from the standpoint of people who refuse, rather than the institutions that seek their compliance. Because refusers work to reshape socio-technical systems, we argue that refusal is an act of design, and that design-based frameworks and methods can contribute to refusal. We characterize refusal strategies across four constituent facets common to all refusal, whatever strategies are used: autonomy , or how refusal accounts for individual and collective interests; time , or whether refusal reacts to past harm or proactively prevents future harm; power , or the extent to which refusal makes change possible; and cost , or whether or not refusal can reduce or redistribute penalties experienced by refusers. We illustrate each facet by drawing on cases of people and collectives that have refused data systems. Together, the four facets of our framework are designed to help scholars and activists describe, evaluate, and imagine new forms of refusal.","PeriodicalId":329595,"journal":{"name":"ACM Journal on Responsible Computing","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Data Refusal From Below: A Framework for Understanding, Evaluating, and Envisioning Refusal as Design\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Zong, J. Nathan Matias\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3630107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Amidst calls for public accountability over large data-driven systems, feminist and indigenous scholars have developed refusal as a practice that challenges the authority of data collectors. However, because data affects so many aspects of daily life, it can be hard to see seemingly different refusal strategies as part of the same repertoire. Furthermore, conversations about refusal often happen from the standpoint of designers and policymakers rather than the people and communities most affected by data collection. In this paper, we introduce a framework for data refusal from below —writing from the standpoint of people who refuse, rather than the institutions that seek their compliance. Because refusers work to reshape socio-technical systems, we argue that refusal is an act of design, and that design-based frameworks and methods can contribute to refusal. We characterize refusal strategies across four constituent facets common to all refusal, whatever strategies are used: autonomy , or how refusal accounts for individual and collective interests; time , or whether refusal reacts to past harm or proactively prevents future harm; power , or the extent to which refusal makes change possible; and cost , or whether or not refusal can reduce or redistribute penalties experienced by refusers. We illustrate each facet by drawing on cases of people and collectives that have refused data systems. Together, the four facets of our framework are designed to help scholars and activists describe, evaluate, and imagine new forms of refusal.\",\"PeriodicalId\":329595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACM Journal on Responsible Computing\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACM Journal on Responsible Computing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3630107\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Journal on Responsible Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3630107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在要求对大型数据驱动系统进行公共问责的呼声中,女权主义者和土著学者将拒绝作为一种挑战数据收集者权威的做法。然而,由于数据影响日常生活的许多方面,因此很难将看似不同的拒绝策略视为相同曲目的一部分。此外,关于拒绝的讨论往往是从设计师和决策者的角度出发,而不是从受数据收集影响最大的个人和社区的角度出发。在本文中,我们引入了一个数据拒绝的框架,从拒绝的人的角度出发,而不是从寻求他们遵守的机构的角度出发。由于拒绝者致力于重塑社会技术系统,我们认为拒绝是一种设计行为,基于设计的框架和方法可以促进拒绝。我们从所有拒绝的四个共同组成方面来描述拒绝策略,无论使用什么策略:自主性,或者拒绝如何解释个人和集体利益;时间,或者拒绝是对过去的伤害做出反应,还是主动防止未来的伤害;权力,或拒绝使改变成为可能的程度;以及成本,或者拒绝是否可以减少或重新分配拒绝者所遭受的惩罚。我们通过引用拒绝数据系统的个人和集体的案例来说明每个方面。总之,我们的框架的四个方面旨在帮助学者和活动家描述、评估和想象新的拒绝形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Data Refusal From Below: A Framework for Understanding, Evaluating, and Envisioning Refusal as Design
Amidst calls for public accountability over large data-driven systems, feminist and indigenous scholars have developed refusal as a practice that challenges the authority of data collectors. However, because data affects so many aspects of daily life, it can be hard to see seemingly different refusal strategies as part of the same repertoire. Furthermore, conversations about refusal often happen from the standpoint of designers and policymakers rather than the people and communities most affected by data collection. In this paper, we introduce a framework for data refusal from below —writing from the standpoint of people who refuse, rather than the institutions that seek their compliance. Because refusers work to reshape socio-technical systems, we argue that refusal is an act of design, and that design-based frameworks and methods can contribute to refusal. We characterize refusal strategies across four constituent facets common to all refusal, whatever strategies are used: autonomy , or how refusal accounts for individual and collective interests; time , or whether refusal reacts to past harm or proactively prevents future harm; power , or the extent to which refusal makes change possible; and cost , or whether or not refusal can reduce or redistribute penalties experienced by refusers. We illustrate each facet by drawing on cases of people and collectives that have refused data systems. Together, the four facets of our framework are designed to help scholars and activists describe, evaluate, and imagine new forms of refusal.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信