Next steps for value sensitive design
Abstract
Questions of human values often arise in HCI research and practice. Such questions can be difficult to address well, and a principled approach can clarify issues of both theory and practice. One such approach is Value Sensitive Design (VSD), an established theory and method for addressing issues of values in a systematic and principled fashion in the design of information technology. In this essay, we suggest however that the theory and at times the presentation of VSD overclaims in a number of key respects, with the result of inhibiting its more widespread adoption and appropriation. We address these issues by suggesting four topics for next steps in the evolution of VSD: (1) tempering VSD's position on universal values; (2) contextualizing existing and future lists of values that are presented as heuristics for consideration; (3) strengthening the voice of the participants in publications describing VSD investigations; and (4) making clearer the voice of the researchers. We propose new or altered approaches for VSD that address these issues of theory, voice, and reportage.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A value sensitive design approach to AIEd would accommodate ethical considerations, such as needs for autonomy and privacy, that could affect student well-being, trust, and learning.
“A value sensitive design approach to AIEd would accommodate ethical considerations, such as needs for autonomy and privacy, that could affect student well-being, trust, and learning.”
From AI Sensing and Intervention in Higher Education: Student Perceptions of Learning Impacts, Affective Responses, and Ethical Priorities (2026) · cites this paper as [18]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 97 · Cited by 365
- Authors
- Borning, A., & Muller, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- IBM (United States) (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2012-05-05
- Pages
- 1125-1134
- OpenAlex
- W2133369086
- Cited by
- 365
- References
- 97
- Citations by year
- 2026: 32 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 11.69
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Keywords
- value-sensitive design, human values, human-computer interaction, universal values, participatory design, research reporting, researcher voice, information technology design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review