‘Hypernudge’: Big Data as a mode of regulation by design

Information Communication and Society

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 118-136

  Yeung, Karen ^a,b  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Big Data; communication studies; law; regulation; social theory; surveillance privacy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84991489613     PISSN: 1369118X     EISSN: 14684462     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2016.1186713     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. A.Acquisti, L.Brandimarte, & G.Loewenstein, (2015). Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science, 347, 509–514. doi:10.1126/science.aaa1465
2. D.Ariely, (2009). Predictably irrational:The hidden forces that shape our decisions. London:Harper Collins.
3. S.Barocas, & H.Nissenbaum, (2014). Big Data’s end run around anonymity and consent. In J.Lane, V.Stodder, S.Bender, & H.Nissenbaum (Eds.), Privacy, Big Data and the public good (pp. 44–75). New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
4. I.Berlin, (1969). Two concepts of liberty. In I.Berlin (Ed.), Four essays on liberty (pp. 118–172). London:Oxford University Press.
5. J.Black, (2001). Decentring regulation:Understanding the role of regulation and self-regulation in a ‘post-regulatory’ world. Current Legal Problems, 54, 103–146. doi:10.1093/clp/54.1.103
6. J.Black, (2008). Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes. Regulation & Governance, 2, 137–164. doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2008.00034.x
7. J.Black, (2014). Learning from regulatory disasters, Sir Frank Holmes Memorial Lecture. Retrieved from http://www.ssrn.com/en/
8. R.Booth, (2014, June 30). Facebook reveals news feed experiment to control emotions. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com
9. L.Bovens, (2008). The ethics of nudge. In T.Grune-Yanoff and S.O.Hansson (Eds.), Preference change:Approaches from philosophy, economics and psychology (pp. 207–219). Dordrecht:Springer.
10. D.boyd, & K.Crawford, (2012). Critical questions for Big Data. Information, Communication and Society, 15, 662–679. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
11. R.Boyne, (2000). Post-panopticism. Economy and Society, 29, 285–307. doi:10.1080/030851400360505
12. R.Brownsword, (2004). The cult of consent:Fixation and fallacy. Kings College Law Journal, 15, 223–251.
13. R.Brownsword, (2005). Code, control, and choice:Why east is east and west is west. Legal Studies, 25, 1–21. doi:10.1111/j.1748-121X.2005.tb00268.x
14. J.Cheney-Lippold, (2011). A new algorithmic identity:Soft biopolitics and the modulation of control. Theory, Culture & Society, 28, 164–181. doi:10.1177/0263276411424420
15. J.Christman, (2009). Autonomy in moral and political philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/autonomy-moral/
16. D.K.Citron, (2008). Technological due process. Washington University Law Review, 85, 1249–1313.
17. D.K.Citron, & F.Pasquale, (2014). The scored society:Due process for automated predictions. Washington Law Review, 89, 1–33.
18. R.V.Clarke, & G.R.Newman, (Eds.). (2005). Designing out crime from products and systems. Monsey, NY:Criminal Justice Press.
19. J.E.Cohen, (2012). Configuring the networked self. New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.
20. J.E.Cohen, (2015). Studying law studying surveillance. Surveillance & Society, 13, 191–101.
21. L.Cranor, B.M.Frischmann, R.Harkins, & H.Nissenbaum, (2013–2014). Panel I:Disclosure and notice practices in private data collection. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 32, 781–812.
22. S.Degli Esposti, (2014). When Big Data meets dataveillance:The hidden side of analytics. Surveillance & Society, 12, 209–225.
23. N.Diakopoulos, (2013, October 3). Race against the algorithms. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/world/
24. J.van Dijck, (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance:Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance & Society, 12(2), 199–208.
25. N.Dow Schull, (2012). Addiction by design. New Jersey, NJ:Princeton University Press.
26. R.Dworkin, (1977). Taking rights seriously. London:Duckworth.
27. M.Eslami, A.Rickmany, K.Vaccaro, A.Aleyasen, A.Vuong, K.Karahalios, K.Hamilton, & C.Sandvig, (2015) “I Always Assumed That I Wasn’t Really That Close to [Her]”:Reasoning about invisible algorithms in the news feed. In Proceeding CHI '15 Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 153–162), ACM New York, NY, USA. Retrieved from http://social.cs.uiuc.edu/papers/pdfs/Eslami_Algorithms_CHI15.pdf.
28. J.Feinberg, (1989). The moral limits of the criminal law volume 3:Harm to self. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
29. R.T.Ford, (2000). Save the robots:Cyber profiling and your so-called life. Stanford Law Review, 52, 1573–1584. doi:10.2307/1229522
30. E.Goldman, (2006). Search engine bias and the demise of search engine utopianism. Yale Journal of Law & Technology, 8, 188–200.
31. A.Gutmann, & D.Thompson, (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
32. B.E.Harcourt, (2014). Governing, exchanging, securing:Big Data and the production of digital knowledge. (Columbia Public Law Research Paper No 14-390). Retrieved from http://www.ssrn.com/en/
33. C.Hood, H.Rothstein, & R.Baldwin, (2001). The government of risk. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
34. D.Kahneman, (2013). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY:Farrer, Strauss and Giroux.
35. J.Kleing, (1983). Paternalism. Manchester:Manchester University Press.
36. A.D.I.Kramer, J.E.Guillory, & J.T.Hancock, (2014). Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 8788–8790. doi:10.1073/pnas.1320040111
37. A.Lambrecht, (2013). Pricing services online, economics of. In S.N.Surlauf & L.E.Blume (Eds.), The New palgrave dictionary of economics. Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved May 12, 2016, from http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2013_P000380
38. B.Latour, (1994). On technical mediation - Philosophy, sociology, genealogy. Common Knowledge, 3(2), 29–64.
39. L.Lessig, (1999). Code and other laws of cyberspace. New York, NY:Basic Books.
40. V.Lukerson, (2014, October 2). Facebook changing research methods after controversial mood study. Time Magazine. Retrieved from http://time.com/
41. V.Lukerson, (2015, July 9). Here’s how Facebook’s news feed actually works. Time Magazine. Retrieved from http://time.com/
42. D.Lyon, (2007). Surveillance studies. Cambridge:Polity Press.
43. D.Lyon, (2014). Surveillance, Snowden, and Big Data:Capacities, consequences, critique. Big Data & Society, 1(2), 1–13. doi:10.1177/2053951714541861
44. C.Mackenzie, & N.Stoljar, (2000). Relational autonomy:Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency and the social self. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
45. V.Mayer-Schonberger, & K.Cukier, (2013). Big Data. London:John Murray.
46. A.M.McDonald, & L.F.Cranor, (2008). The cost of Reading privacy policies. A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, 4, 540–565.
47. M.N.Meyer, (2015). Two cheers for corporate experimentation:The A/B illusion and the virtues of data-driven innovation. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13, 273–332.
48. B.Morgan, & K.Yeung, (2007). An introduction to law and regulation. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
49. J.Nedelsky, (1990). Law, boundaries and the bounded self. Representations, 30, 162–189. doi:10.1525/rep.1990.30.1.99p0354u
50. H.Nissenbaum, (2011). A contextual approach to privacy online. Daedalus, 140(4), 32–48. doi:10.1162/DAED_a_00113
51. J.NyeJr., (2004). Soft power. New York, NY:Public Affairs.
52. E.Pariser, (2012). The filter bubble. London:Penguin Books.
53. F.Pasquale, (2006). Rankings, reductionism, and responsibility. Cleveland State Law Review, 54, 115–138.
54. F.Pasquale, (2015). The black box society. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
55. F.Pasquale, & O.Bracha, (2015). Federal search commission? Access, fairness and accountability in the law of search. Cornell Law Review, 93, 1149–1191.
56. S.R.Peppet, (2014). Regulating the Internet of things:First steps towards managing discrimination, privacy, security and consent. Texas Law Review, 93, 85–176.
57. President’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies. (2013). Liberty and security in a changing world. Washington, DC:Office of the Whitehouse.
58. J.Rauhofer, (2015). Of men and mice:Should the EU data protection authorities’ reaction to Google’s new privacy policy raise concern for the future of the purpose limitation principle. European Data Protection Law Review, 1, 5–15.
59. J.Raz, (1986). The morality of freedom. Oxford:Clarendon Press.
60. P.J.Rey, & E.Boesel, (2014). The web, digital prostheses and augmented subjectivity. In D.L.Kleinman, & K.P.Moore (Eds.), Routledge handbook of science, technology and society (pp. 173–188). Whitney:Routledge.
61. B.Rieder, (2015, February). On the diversity of the accountability problem - Machine learning and knowledge capitalism. Paper presented at the meeting of NYU Information Law Institute, Algorithms and Accountability Conference, New York, NY.
62. E.Selinger, & T.Seager, (2012). Digital jiminy crickets:Do apps that promote ethical behavior diminish our ability to make just decisions? Slate. Retrieved from www.slate.com.
63. J.Shaw, (2014). Why “Big Data” is a big deal. Harvard Magazine, 116(4), 30–35.
64. D.J.Solove, (2013). Privacy self management and the consent dilemma. Harvard Law Review, 126, 1880–1893.
65. R.Thaler, & C.Sunstein, (2008). Nudge. London:Penguin Books.
66. A.Tversky, & D.Kahneman, (1974). Judgment under uncertainty:Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131. doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
67. A.Tversky, & D.Kahneman, (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458. doi:10.1126/science.7455683
68. P.-P.Verbeek, (2006). Materializing morality:Design ethics and technological mediation. Science, Technology & Human Values, 31, 361–380. doi:10.1177/0162243905285847
69. A.von Hirsch, D.Garland, & A.Wakefield, (Eds). (2000). Ethical and social perspectives on situational crime prevention. Portland, OR:Hart Publishing.
70. D.Wendler, (1996). Deception in medical and behavioral research:Is it ever acceptable? The Milbank Quarterly, 74(1), 87–114. doi:10.2307/3350434
71. A.Wertheimer, (1988). Coercion. Princeton:Princeton University Press.
72. S.J.White, (2010, May). What’s wrong with coercion? Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for Ethical Theory and Political Philosophy, Northwestern University.
73. World Medical Association. (2013). World Medical Association declaration of Helsinki:Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310, 2191–2194. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053
74. K.Yeung, (2008). Towards an understanding of regulation by design. In R.Brownsword & K.Yeung (Eds.), Regulating technologies (pp. 79–94). Portland, OR:Hart Publishing.
75. K.Yeung, (2012). Nudge as fudge. The Modern Law Review, 75(1), 122–148. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2230.2012.00893.x
76. K.Yeung, (2016). The forms and limits of choice architecture. Law and Policy, 38(3). doi:10.1111/lapo.12057
77. K.Yeung, & M.Dixon-Woods, (2010). Design-based regulation and patient safety:A regulatory studies perspective. Social Science and Medicine, 71, 502–509. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.04.017
78. J.Zittrain, (2014). Engineering an election. Harvard Law Review Forum, 127, 335.
79. J.Zittrain, (2008) Tethered appliances, software as service, and perfect enforcement. In R.Brownsword & K.Yeung (Eds.), Regulating technologies (pp. 125–156). Portland, OR:Hart Publishing.
80. S.Zuboff, (2015). Big other:Surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology, 30, 75–89. doi:10.1057/jit.2015.5