Locating ethics in data science: Responsibility and accountability in global and distributed knowledge production systems

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences

Volumn 374, Issue 2083, 2016, Pages

  Leonelli, Sabina ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Big data; Epistemology; Ethics; Knowledge production; Research governance; Science policy

Indexed keywords

DATA HANDLING; DATA MINING; PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECTS;

DISTRIBUTED KNOWLEDGE; EPISTEMOLOGY; ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS; ETHICS; KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION; PROCESSING STRATEGIES; REGULATORY STRUCTURE; SCIENCE POLICIES;

BIG DATA;

ETHICS; INFORMATION SCIENCE; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; KNOWLEDGE; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

INFORMATION SCIENCE; INTERNATIONALITY; KNOWLEDGE; SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY;

EID: 85001052365     PISSN: 1364503X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2016.0122     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Star SL, Ruhleder K. 1996 Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: design and access for large information spaces. Inf. Syst. Res. 7, 111-134. (doi:10.1287/isre.7.1.111)
2. Bowker GC. 2006 Memory practices in the sciences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
3. Edwards PN. 2010 A vast machine: computer models, climate data, and the politics of global warming. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
4. Stevens H. 2013 Life out of sequence: bioinformatics and the introduction of computers into biology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
5. Kitchin R. 2014 The data revolution: big data, open data, data infrastructures & their consequences. London, UK: Sage.
6. Borgman C. 2015 Big data, little data, no data: scholarship in the networked world. Cambridge,MA: The MIT Press.
7. Leonelli S. 2016 Data-centric biology: a philosophical study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
8. Floridi L, Illari P. 2014 The philosophy of information quality. Synthese Library 358. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
9. Leonelli S. 2014 What difference does quantity make? On the epistemology of big data in biology. Big Data Soc. 1, 1-11. (doi:10.1177/2053951714534395)
10. Lagoze C. 2014 Big Data, data integrity, and the fracturing of the control zone. Big Data Soc. 1, 1-11. (doi:10.1177/2053951714558281)
11. Edwards PN, Mayernik MS, Batcheller AL, Bowker GC, Borgman CL. 2011 Science friction: data, metadata, and collaboration. Soc. Stud. Sci. 41, 667-690. (doi:10.1177/03063127114 13314)
12. Leonelli S. 2013 Global data for local science: assessing the scale of data infrastructures in biological and biomedical research. BioSocieties 8, 449-465. (doi:10.1057/biosoc.2013.23)
13. Science International 2015 Open data in a big data world. http://www.icsu.org/scienceinternational/accord/open-data-in-a-big-data-world-short (accessed 1 September 2016).
14. European Commission 2016 Open innovation, open science, open to the World. Brussels, Belgium: European Union Publication. http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/open-innovationopen-science-open-to-the-world-pbKI0416263/(accessed 11 October 2016).
15. Kaye J et al. 2012 From patients to partners: participant-centric initiatives in biomedical research. Nat. Rev. Genet. 13, 371-376. (doi:10.1038/nrg3218)
16. Ossorio P. 2011 Bodies of data: genomic data and bioscience data sharing. Soc. Res. 78, 907-932. (doi:10.1016/j.str.2010.08.012.Structure)
17. Bivins TH. 2006 Responsibility and accountability. In Ethics in public relations: responsible advocacy (eds K Fitzpatrick, C Bronstein), pp. 19-38. London, UK: Sage Publishing.
18. Floridi L. 2013 Distributed morality in an information society. Sci. Eng. Ethics 19, 727-743. (doi:10.1007/s11948-012-9413-4)
19. Hilgartner S. 1995 Biomolecular databases: new communication regimes for biology? Sci. Commun. 17, 240-263. (doi:10.1177/1075547095017002009)
20. Mackenzie A. 2003 Bringing sequences to life: how bioinformatics corporealises sequence data. New Genet. Soc. 22, 315-332. (doi:10.1080/1463677032000147180)
21. Hine C. 2006 Databases as scientific instruments and their role in the ordering of scientific work. Soc. Stud. Sci. 36, 269-298. (doi:10.1177/0306312706054047)
22. Strasser BJ. 2011 The experimenter's museum: genbank, natural history, and the moral economies of biomedicine. Isis 102, 60-96. (doi:10.1086/658657)
23. Wouters P, Beaulieu A, Scharnhorst A, Wyatt S (eds). 2013 Virtual knowledge: experimenting in the humanities and the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
24. Levin N, Leonelli S. In press. How does one 'open' science? Questions of value in biological research. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values. (doi:10.1177/0162243916672071)
25. Bezuidenhout L, Leonelli S, Kelly A, Rappert B. In press. Open data and the digital divide in life science research. Sci. Public Pol. (doi:10.1093/scipol/scw036)
26. Data StudiesWebsite. See www.datastudies.eu (accessed 15 July 2016).
27. Hutchins E. 1995 Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Clark A. 1997 Being there: putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. ArthurWB. 1989 Competing technologies, increasing returns and lock-in by historical events. Econ. J. 99, 116-131. (doi:10.2307/2234208)
30. Mittelstadt BD, Floridi L. 2016 The ethics of biomedical big data. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
31. Hill K. 2016 How an Internet mapping glitch turned a random Kansas farm into a digital hell. See http://fusion.net/story/287592/internet-mapping-glitch-kansas-farm/fusion (accessed 12 September 2016).
32. Pulverer B. 2015 Reproducibility blues. EMBO J 34, 2721-2724. (doi:10.15252/embj.201570090)
33. Open Science Collaboration. 2015 Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science 349, 4716. (doi:10.1126/science.aac4716)
34. Floridi L. 2013 Philosophy of information. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
35. Haraway D. 2008 When species meet. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
36. Keating P, Cambrosio A. 2011 Cancer on trial: oncology as a new style of practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
37. Petryna A. 2009 When experiments travel: clinical trials and the global search for the human subject. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38. Sunder Rajan K. 2017 Pharmocracy: value, politics and knowledge in global biomedicine. Duke University Press.
39. Research Data Alliance and CODATA Working Group on Research Data Science Summer Schools. 2016 See http://www.codata.org/working-groups/research-data-science-summerschools (accessed 12 September 2016).
40. Home Office. 2016 Animal research and testing. See https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/animal-research-and-testing (accessed 12 September 2016).
41. Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG. 2013 The ARRIVE guidelines: animal research: reporting of in vivo experiments. NC3Rs. See https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Guidelines/NC3Rs%20ARRIVE%20Guidelines%202013.pdf.
42. Understanding Animal Research: Concordat on Openness on Animal Research. 2014 See http://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk/policy/concordat-openness-animalresearch/.
43. Home Office. Animals in Science Committee. 2016 See https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/animals-in-science-committee (accessed 12 September 2016).
44. Niemi S, Davies G. In preparation. Animal Research, the 3R's and the 'Internet of Things' ILAR 57(3) (special issue on Technology, the Three Rs, and Pharmaceutical Development).
45. UK Cabinet Office 2016 Data science ethical framework, version 1.0. Published 19 May 2016. See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment-data/file/524298/Data-science-ethics-framework-v1.0-for-publication-1-.pdf.
46. Lynch M, Cole S, McNally R, Jordan K. 2009 Truth machine: the contentious history of DNA fingerprinting. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.