Social analysis and collateral impact of pervasive technologies

1
Social analysis and collateral impact of
pervasive technologies

• CNIT - TN

2
Evaluation of the social impact of pervasive
technologies

• Conception of the personal sphere (privacy) and
  use of Pervasive Technologies (PTs)
• Formation, diffusion and social reproduction of
  norms and rules of conduct concerning PTs
• Implementation, adoption and use of pervasive
  technologies (PTs) by private and public
  institutions

3
Impact of PTs on individual and group behavior
Impact of PTs on individual behavior and privacy
concerns
Institutional rules of conduct concerning the
adoption and use of PTs
4
Two main problems

• Pervasive technologies can reduce social space
  and divisions and induce individuals and groups
  to manipulate personal boundaries of knowledge
  and trust
• ? threats to privacy
• When public and private institutions use such
  technologies they put stress on boundaries that
  have been culturally and historically established
• ? emphasis on control

5

• The introduction of PTs in daily life is seen as
  the progressive reduction of the separation
  between the controller and the controlled between
  experts vs non experts.
• We know little, but that the rules concerning
  their use are vague or culturally constrained and
  that the user (controller or controlled) is often
  unaware of the threats and the communication
  processes associated.

6
First aim of our study

• ....is to know more about the impact of pervasive
  technologies on individual users and
  specifically
• their relational attitudes towards technology
  adoption (privacy awareness)
• the rules of conduct that they use when
  communicating with different types of subjects
  (friends, family, acquaintances)
• and users awareness about the release of
  personal details (privacy trade-off).

7
Research design

• In order to evaluate these aspects we need to
  know how people conceive the relation between
  pervasive technologies and individual freedom and
  how much privacy concerns are socially perceived
  (and expressed) in specific groups of the
  population.
• Two levels of analysis
• Individual users
• Group users

8
Research design

• Two different types of experiments (test A and
  test B) will be developed on two types of users
• Experts/ non experts
• A questionnaire concerning impact and use of
  communication technologies will be delivered to
  all the subjects.

9
Research design
Experts Non experts
Group impact Questionnaire test A Questionnaire test A
Individual impact Questionnaire test B Questionnaire test B
10
Test B (individual)

• Goal Identification of attitudes pro/versus
  technologies in relation with protection of the
  personal sphere.
• Stimulus short stories and vignettes with
  anticipated / non anticipated consequences of
  privacy data disclosure.
• Main focus on locus of control and levels of
  personal responsibility (ego, close friends and
  family, third part) and decision about the
  disclosure of personal information

11
Two levels of analysis

• Individual users
• Group users
• Two different types of experiments will be
  developed on two types of users
• Experts/ non experts
• A questionnaire concerning impact and use of
  communication technologies will be delivered to
  all the subjects.

12
Test A (group)

• Goal Evaluation of the impact of PTs on identity
  management and personal information exchange in
  closed communities (ex.class)
• Stimulus communication of personal details among
  friends and classmates.ù
• Main focus on privacy as a property of the
  individual/personal network of relations that can
  be disclosed intentionally (ex. with friends,
  partners, etc..) or violated by others (ex.
  rumors in contagion and influence models).

13
Personal relations of Ego
14
Personal relations of Ego

• What about the use of PTs to maintain, and
  develop the personal relations of Ego?
• Are there differences between the use of PTs for
  personal contacts with family, friends,
  acquaintances etc.
• Which rules of conduct are in use in
  communication and privacy disclosure with
  different type of subjects?

15
Second aim of our study

• The implementation of PTs in daily living is
  strictly linked with economic chances and
  reproduces differentiation processes (culture,
  behaviour, opinions) inside social groups and in
  society.
• In reality the type of privacy associated with
  such technologies is institutionally mediated so
  the old juxtaposition between experts and non
  experts is still underlying.
• Threat of social surveillance

16
Second aim of our study

• We are interested in the emergence and
  establishment of a specific domain of knowledge
  concerning the use of PTs in daily living and
  communication.
• The case study considered concerns the impact of
  PTs and specifically monitoring technologies in
  the home and domestic spaces (smart house,
  hospices, intelligent building). The study is
  based on literature and survey data.

17
Dissemination

• Paper on social impact of technology on privacy
  concerns - Session at ACSIS- INTER conference
  (Sweden)
• Conference on Technology and Society