Juries

The impact of algorithmic decision-making processes on young people's well-being

This study aims to capture the online experiences of young people when interacting with algorithm mediated systems and their impact on their well-being. We draw on qualitative (focus groups) and quantitative (survey) data from a total of 260 young people to bring their opinions to the forefront while eliciting discussions. The results of the study revealed the young people's positive as well as negative experiences of using online platforms. Benefits such as convenience, entertainment and personalised search results were identified. However, the data also reveals participants' concerns for their privacy, safety and trust when online, which can have a significant impact on their well-being. We conclude by recommending that online platforms acknowledge and enact on their responsibility to protect the privacy of their young users, recognising the significant developmental milestones that this group experience during these early years, and the impact that algorithm mediated systems may have on them. We argue that governments need to incorporate policies that require technologists and others to embed the safeguarding of users' well-being within the core of the design of Internet products and services to improve the user experiences and psychological well-being of all, but especially those of children and young people.

A comparison of presentation methods for conducting youth juries

The 5Rights Youth Juries are an educational intervention to promote digital literacy by engaging participants (i.e. jurors) in a deliberative discussion around their digital rights. The main objective of these jury-styled focus groups is to encourage children and young people to identify online concerns and solutions with a view to developing recommendations for government policy-makers and industry chiefs. The methodology included a series of dramatized scenarios that encourage jurors to deliberate about their digital rights. This paper compares two formats for these scenarios: live actors and professionally recorded and edited videos of the same actors. Results failed to show any major differences between formats indicating the cost-effectiveness of the video-recorded format and the possibility for others to run the 5Rights Youth Juries with the support of an online open educational resource.

Citizens' Juries: When Older Adults Deliberate on the Benefits and Risks of Smart Health and Smart Homes

Background: Technology-enabled healthcare or smart health has provided a wealth of products and services to enable older people to monitor and manage their own health conditions at home, thereby maintaining independence, whilst also reducing healthcare costs. However, despite the growing ubiquity of smart health, innovations are often technically driven, and the older user does not often have input into design. The purpose of the current study was to facilitate a debate about the positive and negative perceptions and attitudes towards digital health technologies. Methods: We conducted citizens’ juries to enable a deliberative inquiry into the benefits and risks of smart health technologies and systems. Transcriptions of group discussions were interpreted from a perspective of life-worlds versus systems-worlds. Results: Twenty-three participants of diverse demographics contributed to the debate. Views of older people were felt to be frequently ignored by organisations implementing systems and technologies. Participants demonstrated diverse levels of digital literacy and a range of concerns about misuse of technology. Conclusion: Our interpretation contrasted the life-world of experiences, hopes, and fears with the systems-world of surveillance, efficiencies, and risks. This interpretation offers new perspectives on involving older people in co-design and governance of smart health and smart homes.