RMPP - Discussion Collaboration
Collaborative Learning Discussion 1
Pick a case study from the examples provided by the Association of Computing Machinery (ACM).
Review the application of the ethics code to the situation described and highlight the impact on any relevant legal (jurisdictional or non-jurisdictional) and social issues, as well as on the professionalism of the computing professionals involved. You should provide comparisons to the British Computer Society (BCS) Code of Conduct.
You should demonstrate that you understand the topic covered and ensure you use references to academic literature (including journals, books, and reports)
Your initial posting should respond to the question and be at least 200 words long. Your initial post should be labelled "initial post".
Initial Post
ACM Ethics (2018) provides a case study of an international company called Q Industries responsible for the manufacture of automated response weaponry on autonomous vehicles. These vehicles were used in military and law enforcement engagements. The initial design of the vehicles involved the use of tear gas and acoustic weapons to combat physical attacks by protesters. Due to multiple governmental requirements’, Q Industries extended the design of the vehicles to include lethal weaponry involving target shooting and explosives. Engineers at Q Industries protested against the use lethal weapons and was subsequently sued for breaching their employment contract (ACM Ethics, 2018).
The case study highlights the importance of ethical principles as defined by the ACM (ACM, 2018) and the BCS (BCS, 2022). Looking at the aspect around the engineers approach only, as computing professionals engineers are ethically bound to act in the best interest of the public governed by legislation (principle 1.1 of ACM, 2018). Their actions are justified according to principle 1.2 (Avoid Harm) and principle 2.7 (Foster public awareness) of the ACM (2018). Furthermore, this aligns with the BCS code of conduct (BSC, 2022) which states that computing professionals “have due regard for public health, privacy, security and wellbeing of others and the environment”. However, one must also be cognisance of the fact that employees are bound by the terms and conditions in an employment contract.
One can argue that this would supersede their confidentiality employment agreement. However, an employment agreement is a legally binding document in accordance with the law of that specific country. Marcu et al. (2020) argues that while ethics promote and bring about good they are not laws. On the other hand, the BCS (2022) code of conduct also mentions that information should not be withheld “unless lawfully bound by a duty of confidentiality not to disclose such information”, in this case engineers were legally bounded by an employment agreement.
List of References
ACM Ethics. (2018) ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. Available from: https://ethics.acm.org/ [Accessed 29 January 2023].
BCS. (2022) The Chartered Institute for IT CODE OF CONDUCT FOR BCS MEMBERS. Available from: https://www.bcs.org/media/2211/bcs-code-of-conduct.pdf [Accessed 29 January 2023].
Marcu, D., Milici, D. L., & Danubianu, M. (2020) Software Engineering Ethics. Postmodern Openings 11(4): 248-261. Available from: https://lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/po/article/view/3559/2648 [Accessed 29 January 2023].
Click here to download this post in a .pdf format Peer Responses Peer Response by Wang Wang Peer Response by Zihaad Khan to Sherelle Garwood Peer Response by Zihaad Khan to Wang Wang The following post is a summary post based on peer responses received during the discussion.Summary Post
The ACM case study of Automated Active Response Weaponry looks at the ethical dilemma faced by engineers who work in the field of technology and the military. Q Industries, an international company, was responsible for manufacturing autonomous vehicles equipped with weapons for military and law enforcement use. Initially, these vehicles were designed to use tear gas and acoustic weapons for physical defence against protesters, but later, the design was extended to include lethal weapons such as target shooting and explosives. This move led to protests from the engineers at Q Industries, who felt that this use of lethal weapons went against their ethical principles. The company sued the engineers for breaching their employment contract, leading to a conflict between ethical considerations and the legally binding nature of an employment agreement.
The case brings up important points related to ethics in technology, specifically the ethical principles defined by the ACM Code of Ethics (ACM Ethics, 2018) and the BCS Code of Conduct (BCS, 2022). According to the ACM (ACM Ethics, 2018), computing professionals are ethically bound to act in the best interest of the public and to avoid harm, while the BCS code of conduct (BCS, 2022) states that “computing professionals must have due regard for public health, privacy, security, wellbeing of others and the environment”. In this case, the engineers felt that their ethical obligations to the public took priority over their employment agreement, but it also highlights the need for computing professionals to understand the limitations of their ethical obligations in the context of the law (Marcu et al., 2020).
The case also raises questions about the responsibilities of technology professionals in ensuring the ethical use of their products and the importance of considering the ethical implications of technology in addition to its functionality (Albrechtslund, 2007). It highlights the need for technology professionals to have a clear understanding of what they consider to be "good" in making ethical decisions and the importance of attending ethics seminars to help make these decisions (Mitchell, 2018). In conclusion, the case serves as a reminder that technology professionals must balance their obligations to their employers with their ethical obligations to society.
List of References
ACM Ethics. (2018) ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. Available from: https://ethics.acm.org/ [Accessed 10 February 2023].
Albrechtslund, A. (2007) Ethics and technology design. Ethics and Information Technology 9(1): 63-72. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-006-9129-8 [Accessed 11 February 2023].
BCS. (2022) The Chartered Institute for IT CODE OF CONDUCT FOR BCS MEMBERS. Available from: https://www.bcs.org/media/2211/bcs-code-of- conduct.pdf [Accessed 10 February 2023].
Marcu, D., Milici, D. L., & Danubianu, M. (2020) Software Engineering Ethics. Postmodern Openings 11(4): 248-261. Available from: https://lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/po/article/view/3559/2648 [Accessed 10 February 2023].
Mitchell, J. (2018) Ethics vs morality. Available from: https://www.bcs.org/articles-opinion-and-research/ethics-vs-morality/ [Accessed 11 February 2023].
Click here to download this post in .pdf format Tutor Feedback by Karen OutramCollaborative Learning Discussion 2
Abi is a researcher at an institute and also a statistical programmer. Abi has received a project from a manufacturer to review the nutritional value of a new cereal, Whizzz. Having collected the necessary data, he now needs to perform the appropriate analyses and print the reports for him to send to the manufacturer. Unfortunately, the data Abi has collected seems to refute the claim that Whizzz is nutritious, and, in fact, they may indicate that Whizzz is harmful.
Abi also realises that some other correlations could be performed that would cast Whizzz in a more favourable light. “After all,” he thinks, “I can use statistics to support either side of any issue.”
Ethical Concerns- Clearly, if Abi changed data values in this study he would be acting unethically. But is it any more ethical for him to suggest analysing correct data in a way that supports two or more different conclusions?
- Is Abi obligated to present both the positive and the negative analyses?
- Is Abi responsible for the use to which others put his program results?
- If Abi does put forward both sets of results to the manufacturer, he suspects that they will publicise only the positive ones. What other courses of action has he?
You should also highlight legal, social and professional impacts of any choices made. Please note that there are no right or wrong answers here and you may introduce local, as well as international, legislature in your responses.
Initial Post
The case study presented is about Abi, a researcher and statistical programmer who has received a project from a manufacturer to review the nutritional value of a new cereal called Whizzz. Abi finds himself in a predicament after analysing the results which indicate that Whizzz may not be nutritious and could possibly be harmful to the public. Abi has statistics to support both sides of this issue.
As a researcher and statistical programmer Abi is bound by various code of ethics, like the Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice by the American Statistical Association (ASA, 2022). According to these guidelines Abi has a professional responsibility to perform research with integrity and to report his findings truthfully and accurately, regardless of the outcome or the way he feels. It would be unethical for Abi to suggest analysing correct data in a way that supports two or more conclusions.
Abi has an ethical, social, legal and professional obligation to report all of the positive and negative findings of his research according to the ACM Code of Ethics (ACM, 2018) and the American Statistical Association (ASA, 2022). If any data is omitted or if the results are biased, the integrity which is a necessary driver of research (Lowenberg & Puebla, 2022) can be questioned. Without a thorough set of results, both positive and negative, the manufacturer will not be given a comprehensive representation of the research and will not be able to make an informed decision.
According to the American Statistical Association (ASA, 2022), statisticians have a responsibility to ensure that their work is used appropriately, for their intended purpose and in accordance with ethical and legal standards. This would apply to Abi as well. Specifically, the guidelines mention that statistical work is to be used for its intended purpose only, and not used to mislead or misrepresent information (ASA, 2022). This is echoed by the ACM Code of Ethics as well (ACM, 2018). However, while Abi is responsible for taking reasonable steps to ensure that his results are used appropriately, he cannot control how others use his results once published.
If Abi suspects that the manufacturer will only publicise the positive results, he should confront the manufacturer and explain to them the ethical and legal implications of doing so. Both results should be presented together.
In conclusion, research findings are often used to make critical decisions as well as develop and shape policies in many instances. It is for this reason that research must be conducted accurately and with integrity. Any manipulation of the data or analysis can undermine the credibility of the research, which can have significant legal, social, and professional implications.
List of References
ACM (2018) Association for Computing Machinery. ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. Available from: https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics [Accessed 12 March 2023].
ASA (2022) American Statistical Association. Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice. Available from: https://www.amstat.org/your-career/ethical-guidelines-for-statistical-practice [Accessed 12 March 2023].
Lowenberg, D & Puebla, I (2022) Responsible handling of ethics in data publication. PLoS Biol 20(3): 1-2. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001606 [Accessed 13 March 2023].
Click here to download this post in .pdf format Peer Responses Peer Response by Wang Wang Peer Response by Jonathan Callaghan Peer Response by Zihaad Khan to Jonathan Callaghan Peer Response by Zihaad Khan to Wang Wang Peer Response by Zihaad Khan to Sherelle Garwood The following post is a summary post based on peer responses received during the discussion.Summary Post
The initial post highlights the importance of research integrity and the responsibility of researchers to report findings truthfully and accurately, as well as the ethical, social, legal, and professional obligations that researchers have by abiding by the ACM Code of Ethics (ACM, 2018) and the Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice (ASA, 2022). The post also highlights that research findings are often used to make critical decisions, and therefore, any manipulation of the data or analysis can undermine the credibility of the research (Lowenberg & Puebla, 2022).
Contributions to the discussion by Callaghan (2023) pointed out that Abi cannot control the usage of his findings once published and that the manufacturer's failure to comply with ethical and legal standards could result in legal proceedings, damaging their reputation and losing potential sales.
Furthermore, Wang (2023) emphasized the importance of presenting a complete picture of the analysis, not just the aspects that the manufacturer would be pleased to hear, and highlights the guidelines from the American Statistical Association (ASA) regarding the manner in which information is framed to avoid disproportionate harms to vulnerable groups (ASA, 2022). Wang (2023) further suggests that Abi could consider turning to the ASA first for guidance on his actions, given their expertise in statistics.
Overall, the discussion stresses the importance of research integrity, accurately reporting findings, and following ethical and legal guidelines. Any manipulation of the data or analysis can undermine the credibility of the research, which can have significant legal, social, and professional implications.
List of References
ACM (2018) Association for Computing Machinery. ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. Available from: https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics [Accessed 20 March 2023].
ASA (2022) American Statistical Association. Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice. Available from: https://www.amstat.org/your-career/ethical-guidelines-for- statistical-practice [Accessed 21 March 2023].
Callaghan, J. (2023) Collaborative Learning Discussion 2 Initial Post. Available from: https://www.my-course.co.uk/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=145290 [Accessed 24 March 2023].
Lowenberg, D & Puebla, I (2022) Responsible handling of ethics in data publication. PLoS Biol 20(3): 1-2. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001606 [Accessed 21 March 2023].
Wang, W. (2023) Collaborative Learning Discussion 2 Initial Post. Available from: https://www.my-course.co.uk/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=145290 [Accessed 24 March 2023].
Click here to download this post in .pdf format Tutor Feedback by Karen Outram