AI is developing rapidly, as are concerns about the environmental impact of its training and deployment. Studies about the environmental sustainability of AI have begun to emerge in the past five years, stressing the need for critical reflection on the discursive underbelly of this emerging scholarship. For example, how do authors frame the problem of the environmental impact of AI? Are there any ethical reflections accompanying their reporting, and if so, which ethical theories and principles guide normative considerations about the environmental impact of AI? In this study, we conduct a scoping literature review on (1) how authors refer to and frame the problem of the environmental impact of AI systems, (2) who is ascribed responsibility for mitigating said impact, (3) what mitigative measures are proposed, and (4) what normative commitments justify such prescriptive normative statements. Our findings indicate that most literature on the topic is concentrated in computer science, engineering, and natural sciences, and the humanities are mostly absent. This results in a dominance of technofix attitudes towards the problem, and a narrow and limited engagement with ethical principles and theories. As such, we argue for more interdisciplinary work on the environmental sustainability of AI, leading to more diverse solutions and more explicit and pluralistic ethical starting points, grounded, for example, in relational and more-than-human ethics. The findings of this review highlight gaps in the literature and opportunities for developers, social scientists, and AI ethicists for more effective and diverse responses to AI’s environmental impact.

While mental health apps can help to promote adolescents’ mental health, prevent mental health problems, and reduce symptoms, maintaining sufficient user engagement with these apps remains challenging. This is often caused by a mismatch between the needs and preferences of adolescents and what the apps offer. Therefore, we need a better understanding of (i) adolescents’ needs and preferences and (ii) potential differences based on user characteristics. To this end, we qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed a dataset describing the user experience of 1312 Dutch adolescents (12–25 years) from the general population after they interacted for several weeks with a gamified mHealth app (the Grow It! app) that aims to promote momentary emotional awareness, reflection, and adaptive coping. A total of 4833 free-text survey responses spanning five user experience survey questions were analyzed using an inductive and iterative coding process, while accounting for intercoder reliability. We used (i) a thematic analysis to identify adolescents’ needs and preferences related to the app, and (ii) an exploratory quantitative analysis of the subthemes to investigate potential differences in which needs and preferences were mentioned by adolescents based on demographics. Through our thematic analysis, we identified three overarching themes related to the app’s design: usability , psychological impact , and meaningful interactive features . Furthermore, we identified two overarching themes that related to the adolescents’ motivation to use the app: intrinsic (de)motivators , and social–environmental factors impacting usage . Each of these themes consisted of four subthemes. Our exploratory statistical analysis shed light on several differences in how frequently these subthemes were mentioned based on age, sex, and educational level. By synthesizing our insights, we identify five design implications that can help tailor future mHealth apps to adolescents’ needs and preferences. These include concrete suggestions to personalize self-monitoring, include actionable insights, align content with personal needs, implement meaningful interactive features (e.g., competitions, gamification, and social communication), and make apps appealing to the entire target group.

This chapter explores the intersection between philosophy and design in addressing political and sociotechnical challenges, particularly the role of AI in democratic societies. Philosophical reflection in technological design is often limited to post-development audits, reducing its potential impact. We argue for a non-hierarchical, co-creative relationship between philosophy and design that expands the conceptual space for interventions. Using the "Moments of Reading" workshop, held in 2023 within the AI DeMoS Lab at TU Delft, we explore how philosophy and design can co-generate knowledge by collectively articulating complex concepts like AI, democracy, and design. The workshop employed a card-based method to prompt participants into exploring the fluidity of these terms, highlighting how conceptual work in philosophy and material practice in design can mutually reinvigorate each other. By reframing philosophical reflection as a participatory and relational practice, we move away from rigid, pre-defined identities in stakeholder engagement. Instead, we advocate for a flexible, interpretative approach that values non-identity as a guiding principle for conceptual articulation. Ultimately, this chapter offers a model of doing philosophy through design, emphasizing collective material practices that reimagine how we approach the ethical and political dimensions of AI in democratic societies.

Integrating human support with chatbot-based behavior change interventions raises three challenges: (1) attuning the support to an individual’s state (e.g., motivation) for enhanced engagement, (2) limiting the use of the concerning human resources for enhanced efficiency, and (3) optimizing outcomes on ethical aspects (e.g., fairness). Therefore, we conducted a study in which 679 smokers and vapers had a 20% chance of receiving human feedback between five chatbot sessions. We find that having received feedback increases retention and effort spent on preparatory activities. However, analyzing a reinforcement learning (RL) model fit on the data shows there are also states where not providing feedback is better. Even this “standard” benefit-maximizing RL model is value-laden. It not only prioritizes people who would benefit most, but also those who are already doing well and want feedback. We show how four other ethical principles can be incorporated to favor other smoker subgroups, yet, interdependencies exist.

With psychiatry lagging behind other medical fields in terms of innovation in instruments and methods, AI provides it an opportunity to catch up. Advocates of digital phenotyping promise to provide an objective tool that detects symptoms by analysing data from personal devices. We argue that digital phenotyping requires a more reflexive and critical approach to its design and an alignment of the clinicians’ interests in generating relevant evidence with the needs of service users who seek tools to manage their condition. We propose a felt informatics approach, situating digital phenotyping design within the problem space of pragmatist aesthetics. Within this perspective, felt life becomes a central object and a site for digital phenotyping design. This paper reveals the ways diagnostic data mediates mental ill health experience, emphasises the cultivation of aesthetic sensibility as a fundamental element of digital phenotyping and includes design considerations for practitioners and researchers.

This paper examines the potential educational uses of chat-based large language models (LLMs), moving past initial hype and skepticism. Although LLM outputs often evoke fascination and resemble human writing, they are unpredictable and must be used with discernment. Several metaphors—like calculators, cars, and drunk tutors—highlight distinct models for student interactions with LLMs, which we explore in the paper. We suggest that LLMs hold a potential in students’ learning by fostering proleptic reasoning through scaffolding, i.e., presenting a technological accompaniment in anticipating and responding to potential objections to arguments. Here, the technical limitations of LLMs can be reframed as beneficial when fostering anticipatory reasoning. Whether their outputs are accurate or not, evaluating them stimulates learning. LLMs require students to critically engage, emphasizing analytical thinking over mere memorization. This interaction helps solidify knowledge. Additionally, we explore how engaging with LLMs can prepare students for constructive collective discussions and provide first steps in addressing epistemic injustices by highlighting potential research blind spots. Thus, while acknowledging the sociopolitical and ethical complexities of using LLMs in education, we suggest that when used in an informed way, they can promote critical thinking through anticipatory reasoning.

This paper proposes and reflects on a teaching methodology for introducing relational ethics in the engineering curriculum based on a pilot at TU Delft in the Netherlands in a course for robotics engineers. Differently from prevalent models of ethics courses, we shifted from having students apply ethical theories to technologies to having them reflect on different aspects of human-robot relations from a more-than-human perspective. This redesign was prompted by conceptual and practical motivations related to (1) a lack of methodological examples of relational ethics in engineering ethics education, (2) a call for more experiential education, and (3) a push to re-evaluate course assessment due to Generative AI. Aside from the lecture content, students explored various dimensions of relational ethics in a thinking-through-doing manner by crafting a companion robot in the tutorials. This culminated in an individual essay in which students reflected on the question ‘How to live well with robots?,’ reflecting on their developing relations with their robotic companion and supported by visual evidence of their human-robot interactions throughout the course. Finally, we provide reflections on this experimental course redesign, outlining several considerations for those intending to integrate relational ethics into their curricula and suggesting avenues for further work.

Our democratic systems have been challenged by the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) and its pervasive usage in our society. For instance, by analyzing individuals’ social media data, AI algorithms may develop detailed user profiles that capture individuals’ specific interests and susceptibilities. These profiles are leveraged to derive personalized propaganda, with the aim of influencing individuals toward specific political opinions. To address this challenge, the value of privacy can serve as a bridge, as having a sense of privacy can create space for people to reflect on their own political stance prior to making critical decisions, such as voting for an election. In this paper, we explore a novel approach by harnessing the potential of AI to enhance the privacy of social-media data. By leveraging adversarial machine learning, i.e., “AI versus AI,” we aim to fool AI-generated user profiles to help users hold a stake in resisting political profiling and preserve the deliberative nature of their political choices. More specifically, our approach probes the conceptual possibility of infusing people’s social media data with minor alterations that can disturb user profiling, thereby reducing the efficacy of the personalized influences generated by political actors. Our study delineates the boundary of ethical and practical implications associated with this ‘AI versus AI’ approach, highlighting the factors for the AI and ethics community to consider in facilitating deliberative decision-making toward democratic elections.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are expected to significantly impact various socio-technical systems, offering transformative possibilities for improved interaction between humans and technology. However, their integration poses complex challenges due to the intricate interplay between societal structures, human behaviour, and technological innovation. This research explores these multifaceted challenges, emphasising the need for a human-centered approach in integrating LLMs to ensure that technological advancements are aligned with ethical standards and societal needs. Utilizing a structured methodology comprising a workshop, literature analysis, and expert collaborations, the study uses a multi-dimensional human-centered AI framework to guide the responsible integration of LLMs. Key insights include the importance of inclusive data, considering unintended consequences, maintaining privacy, and respecting intellectual property rights. The paper identifies and advocates for principles like human-in-the-loop, continuous longitudinal studies, proactive awareness campaigns, and regular audits to develop LLMs that are ethically sound, adaptable, and effectively integrated into various socio-technical systems, thus addressing user needs and broader societal impacts. The paper also underlines the importance of collaboration among academia, industry, and policymakers to develop LLMs that are ethically aligned, socially beneficial, and adaptable to future societal needs. The findings offer valuable insights into the strategic integration of LLMs, advocating for a broader research perspective beyond industrial motivations to fully understand and leverage LLMs in socio-technical landscapes.

Practice and recent evidence show that state-of-the-art (SotA) automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems do not perform equally well for all speaker groups. Many factors can cause this bias against different speaker groups. This paper, for the first time, systematically quantifies and finds speech recognition bias against gender, age, regional accents and non-native accents, and investigates the origin of this bias by investigating bias cross-lingually (i.e., Dutch and Mandarin) and for two different SotA ASR architectures (a hybrid DNN-HMM and an attention based end-to-end (E2E) model) through a phoneme error analysis. The results show that only a fraction of the bias can be explained by pronunciation differences between speaker groups, and that in order to mitigate bias, language- and architecture specific solutions need to be found.

In Moral Hermeneutics and Technology: Making Moral Sense through Human-Technology-World Relations, Olya Kudina explores the role of technology in the way people arrive at their moral intuitions and choices and revise their moral commitments, a phenomenon she calls “moral hermeneutics.” This book considers technology as a mediator of human relations and questions the traditional anthropocentric view of morality. Drawing on the philosophical traditions of postphenomenology and pragmatism and empirical explorations from multiple case studies, Kudina shows how values co-evolve with the dynamic human-technology-world environment and even change in response to it. Consequently, Kudina presents morality as a dynamic practice of sense-making, where people, technologies, and the cultural setting all play an active role. This book explores the implications of such a technologically mediated moral hermeneutics for the informed use, design, and governance of technologies, while accounting for the intimate connection between values and technologies.

We propose a pragmatist account of value change that helps to understand how and why values sometimes change due to technological developments. Inspired by John Dewey’s writings on value, we propose to understand values as evaluative devices that carry over from earlier experiences and that are to some extent shared in society. We discuss the various functions that values fulfil in moral inquiry and propose a conceptual framework that helps to understand value change as the interaction between three manifestations of value distinguished by Dewey, i.e., “immediate value,” “values as the result of inquiry” and “generalized values.” We show how this framework helps to distinguish three types of value change: value dynamism, value adaptation, and value emergence, and we illustrate these with examples from the domain of technology. We argue that our account helps to better understand how technology may induce value change, namely through the creation of what Dewey calls indeterminate situations, and we show how our account can integrate several insights on (techno)moral change offered by other authors.

This paper focuses on two examples of the introduction and use of COVID-19 contact tracing apps in The Netherlands (CoronaMelder) and Belgium (Coronalert). It aims to offer a critical, sociotechnical perspective on tracing apps to understand how social, technical, and institutional dimensions form the ingredients for increasing surveillance. While it is still too early to gauge the implications of surveillance-related initiatives in the fight against COVID-19, the “technology theatre” put in place worldwide has already shown that very little can be done to prevent the deployment of technologies, even if their effectiveness is yet to be determined. The context-specific perspective outlined here offers insights into the interests of many different actors involved in the technology theatre, for instance, the corporate interest in sociotechnical frameworks (both apps rely on the Google/Apple exposure notifications application programming interface). At the same time, our approach seeks to go beyond dystopian narratives that do not consider important sociocultural dimensions, such as choices made during app development and implementation to mitigate potential negative impacts on privacy.

In this paper, we examine the qualitative moral impact of machine learning-based clinical decision support systems in the process of medical diagnosis. To date, discussions about machine learning in this context have focused on problems that can be measured and assessed quantitatively, such as by estimating the extent of potential harm or calculating incurred risks. We maintain that such discussions neglect the qualitative moral impact of these technologies. Drawing on the philosophical approaches of technomoral change and technological mediation theory, which explore the interplay between technologies and morality, we present an analysis of concerns related to the adoption of machine learning-aided medical diagnosis. We analyze anticipated moral issues that machine learning systems pose for different stakeholders, such as bias and opacity in the way that models are trained to produce diagnoses, changes to how health care providers, patients, and developers understand their roles and professions, and challenges to existing forms of medical legislation. Albeit preliminary in nature, the insights offered by the technomoral change and the technological mediation approaches expand and enrich the current discussion about machine learning in diagnostic practices, bringing distinct and currently underexplored areas of concern to the forefront. These insights can contribute to a more encompassing and better informed decision-making process when adapting machine learning techniques to medical diagnosis, while acknowledging the interests of multiple stakeholders and the active role that technologies play in generating, perpetuating, and modifying ethical concerns in health care.

This paper explores the role of moral uncertainty in explaining the morally disruptive character of new technologies. We argue that existing accounts of technomoral change do not fully explain its disruptiveness. This explanatory gap can be bridged by examining the epistemic dimensions of technomoral change, focusing on moral uncertainty and inquiry. To develop this account, we examine three historical cases: the introduction of the early pregnancy test, the contraception pill, and brain death. The resulting account highlights what we call “differential disruption” and provides a resource for fields such as technology assessment, ethics of technology, and responsible innovation.