Firaz Peer
ABSTRACT
This article is a response to scholars calling for conceptualizing local values of data justice. Such values are grounded in the ways local communities utilize and understand data that has been created for their use. To elicit these values, I organized 11 data literacy workshops with community leaders in Atlanta’s Historic Westside neighborhoods. Analyzing the qualitative data I gathered from these workshops using Grounded Theory (GT) allowed me to identify three values of data justice that were prioritized by community leaders. These include (i) Support the community’s data infrastructure literacy, (ii) Empower the community through data, and (iii) Foster accountability through data. These local values and the methods I used to engage with the Westside can guide other researchers interested in creating civic data infrastructures with their communities.
- Chris Anderson. 2008. The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete. Wired (2008). https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/Google Scholar
- Stefan Baack. 2015. Datafication and empowerment: How the open data movement re-articulates notions of democracy, participation, and journalism. Big Data & Society 2, 2 (2015), 2053951715594634.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Liam Bannon and Pelle Ehn. 2013. Design Design Matters in Participatory Design. In Routledge international handbook of participatory design, Jesper Simonsenand Toni Robertson (Eds.). Routledge, 37–63.Google Scholar
- Jo Bates, Yu-Wei Lin, and Paula Goodale. 2016. Data journeys: Capturing the socio-material constitution of data objects and flows. Big Data & Society 3, 2 (2016), 2053951716654502.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rahul Bhargava. [n.d.]. Remix a Visualization. https://databasic.io/en/culture/remixGoogle Scholar
- Rahul Bhargava. 2017. You Don’t Need a Data Scientist, You Need a Data Culture. https://datatherapy.org/2017/12/06/building-a-data-culture/Google Scholar
- Alan Borning and Michael Muller. 2012. Next steps for value sensitive design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1125–1134.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pam Briggs and Lisa Thomas. 2015. An inclusive, value sensitive design perspective on future identity technologies. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 22, 5(2015), 1–28.Google ScholarDigital Library
- John M Carroll, Jordan Beck, Shipi Dhanorkar, Jomara Binda, Srishti Gupta, and Haining Zhu. 2018. Strengthening community data: towards pervasive participation. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age. 1–9.Google ScholarDigital Library
- John M Carroll and Mary Beth Rosson. 2013. Wild at home: The neighborhood as a living laboratory for HCI. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 20, 3(2013), 1–28.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alan Chamberlain, Andy Crabtree, Tom Rodden, Matt Jones, and Yvonne Rogers. 2012. Research in the wild: understanding’in the wild’approaches to design and development. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 795–796.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sasha Costanza-Chock. 2018. Design justice: Towards an intersectional feminist framework for design theory and practice. Proceedings of the Design Research Society(2018).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Christopher A Le Dantec and Carl DiSalvo. 2013. Infrastructuring and the formation of publics in participatory design. Social Studies of Science 43, 2 (2013), 241–264.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tim Davies. 2010. Open data, democracy and public sector reform. A look at open government data use from data. gov. uk (2010), 1–47.Google Scholar
- Lina Dencik, Arne Hintz, and Jonathan Cable. 2016. Towards data justice? The ambiguity of anti-surveillance resistance in political activism. Big Data & Society 3, 2 (2016), 2053951716679678.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Michael Ann DeVito, Ashley Marie Walker, and Julia R Fernandez. 2021. Values (Mis) alignment: Exploring Tensions Between Platform and LGBTQ+ Community Design Values. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1(2021), 1–27.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Catherine D’Ignazio and Rahul Bhargava. [n.d.]. Data Culture. https://databasic.io/en/culture/Google Scholar
- Catherine D’Ignazio and Rahul Bhargava. 2016. DataBasic: Design principles, tools and activities for data literacy learners. The Journal of Community Informatics 12, 3 (2016).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Catherine D’ignazio and Lauren F Klein. 2020. Data feminism. MIT press.Google Scholar
- Lynn Dombrowski, Ellie Harmon, and Sarah Fox. 2016. Social justice-oriented interaction design: Outlining key design strategies and commitments. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. 656–671.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Marian Dörk, Patrick Feng, Christopher Collins, and Sheelagh Carpendale. 2013. Critical InfoVis: exploring the politics of visualization. In CHI’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2189–2198.Google Scholar
- Catherine d’Ignazio and Lauren F Klein. 2016. Feminist data visualization. Workshop on Visualization for the Digital Humanities (VIS4DH), Baltimore. IEEE.Google Scholar
- Paul N Edwards, Steven J Jackson, Geoffrey C Bowker, and Cory P Knobel. 2007. Understanding infrastructure: Dynamics, tensions, and design. (2007).Google Scholar
- Sheena Erete, Emily Ryou, Geoff Smith, Khristina Marie Fassett, and Sarah Duda. 2016. Storytelling with data: Examining the use of data by non-profit organizations. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on Computer-Supported cooperative work & social computing. 1273–1283.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Stephen Few. 2006. Information dashboard design: The effective visual communication of data. Vol. 2. O’reilly Sebastopol, CA.Google Scholar
- Mark Frank, Johanna Walker, Judie Attard, and Alan Tygel. 2016. Data Literacy-What is it and how can we make it happen?The Journal of Community Informatics 12, 3 (2016).Google Scholar
- Batya Friedman and David G Hendry. 2019. Value sensitive design: Shaping technology with moral imagination. Mit Press.Google Scholar
- Batya Friedman, Peter H. Kahn Jr., and Alan Borning. 2008. Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chapter 4, 69–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470281819.ch4 arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9780470281819.ch4Google Scholar
- Jonathan Gray, Carolin Gerlitz, and Liliana Bounegru. 2018. Data infrastructure literacy. Big Data & Society 5, 2 (2018), 2053951718786316.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Erik Grönvall, Lone Malmborg, and Jörn Messeter. 2016. Negotiation of values as driver in community-based PD. In Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference: Full papers-Volume 1. 41–50.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael Gurstein. 2003. Effective use: A community informatics strategy beyond the digital divide. First Monday (2003).Google Scholar
- Michael B Gurstein. 2011. Open data: Empowering the empowered or effective data use for everyone?First Monday (2011).Google Scholar
- Donna Haraway. 2020. Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Feminist theory reader. Routledge, 303–310.Google Scholar
- Richard Heeks and Jaco Renken. 2018. Data justice for development: What would it mean?Information Development 34, 1 (2018), 90–102.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard Heeks and Satyarupa Shekhar. 2019. Datafication, development and marginalised urban communities: An applied data justice framework. Information, Communication & Society 22, 7 (2019), 992–1011.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lilly C Irani and M Six Silberman. 2013. Turkopticon: Interrupting worker invisibility in amazon mechanical turk. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 611–620.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nassim JafariNaimi, Lisa Nathan, and Ian Hargraves. 2015. Values as hypotheses: design, inquiry, and the service of values. Design issues 31, 4 (2015), 91–104.Google Scholar
- Jeffrey Alan Johnson. 2014. From open data to information justice. Ethics and Information Technology 16, 4 (2014), 263–274.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jeffrey Alan Johnson. 2016. The value—and limits—of distributive justice in information privacy. In Western Political Science Association 2016 Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA. 23–26.Google Scholar
- Helena Karasti and Jeanette Blomberg. 2018. Studying infrastructuring ethnographically. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 27, 2 (2018), 233–265.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Finn Kensing and Joan Greenbaum. 2013. Heritage: having a say. In Routledge international handbook of participatory design, Jesper Simonsenand Toni Robertson (Eds.). Routledge, 21–36.Google Scholar
- Rob Kitchin and Tracey Lauriault. 2014. Towards critical data studies: Charting and unpacking data assemblages and their work. (2014).Google Scholar
- Rob Kitchin, Tracey P Lauriault, and Gavin McArdle. 2015. Knowing and governing cities through urban indicators, city benchmarking and real-time dashboards. Regional Studies, Regional Science 2, 1 (2015), 6–28.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jes A Koepfler, Katie Shilton, and Kenneth R Fleischmann. 2013. A stake in the issue of homelessness: Identifying values of interest for design in online communities. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Communities and Technologies. 36–45.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Christopher A Le Dantec, Erika Shehan Poole, and Susan P Wyche. 2009. Values as lived experience: evolving value sensitive design in support of value discovery. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1141–1150.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yanni Alexander Loukissas. 2017. Taking Big Data apart: local readings of composite media collections. Information Communication and Society 20, 5 (2017), 651–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1211722Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shannon Mattern. 2016. Interfacing urban intelligence. Code and the City 4960(2016).Google Scholar
- Michael Muller. 2014. Curiosity, creativity, and surprise as analytic tools: Grounded theory method. In Ways of Knowing in HCI. Springer, 25–48.Google Scholar
- Michael Muller, Ingrid Lange, Dakuo Wang, David Piorkowski, Jason Tsay, Q Vera Liao, Casey Dugan, and Thomas Erickson. 2019. How data science workers work with data: Discovery, capture, curation, design, creation. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–15.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael J Muller and Sandra Kogan. 2010. Grounded theory method in HCI and CSCW. Cambridge: IBM Center for Social Software 28, 2 (2010), 1–46.Google Scholar
- Tim O’Reilly. 2011. Government as a Platform. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization 6, 1(2011), 13–40.Google Scholar
- Nassim Parvin. 2018. Doing justice to stories: On ethics and politics of digital storytelling. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 4 (2018), 515–534.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Firaz Peer and Carl DiSalvo. 2019. Workshops as Boundary Objects for Data Infrastructure Literacy and Design. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 1363–1375.Google Scholar
- Aare Puussaar, Ian G Johnson, Kyle Montague, Philip James, and Peter Wright. 2018. Making open data work for civic advocacy. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW(2018), 1–20.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ingrid Robeyns. 2003. The capability approach: an interdisciplinary introduction. In Training course preceding the Third International Conference on the Capability Approach, Pavia, Italy. 29.Google Scholar
- Yvonne Rogers. 2011. Interaction design gone wild: striving for wild theory. interactions 18, 4 (2011), 58–62.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yvonne Rogers and Paul Marshall. 2017. Research in the Wild. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 10, 3(2017), i–97.Google Scholar
- Susan Leigh Star and Anselm Strauss. 1999. Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW) 8, 1 (1999), 9–30.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lucy Suchman. 2002. Located accountabilities in technology production. Scandinavian journal of information systems 14, 2 (2002), 7.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alex S Taylor, Siân Lindley, Tim Regan, David Sweeney, Vasillis Vlachokyriakos, Lillie Grainger, and Jessica Lingel. 2015. Data-in-place: Thinking through the relations between data and community. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2863–2872.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Linnet Taylor. 2017. What is data justice? The case for connecting digital rights and freedoms globally. Big Data & Society 4, 2 (2017), 2053951717736335.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Linnet Taylor, Gargi Sharma, Aaron Martin, and Shazade Jameson. 2020. Data justice and covid-19. London, Meatspace Press.Google Scholar
- Nick Taylor, Keith Cheverst, Peter Wright, and Patrick Olivier. 2013. Leaving the wild: lessons from community technology handovers. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1549–1558.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Annuska Zolyomi, Anne Spencer Ross, Arpita Bhattacharya, Lauren Milne, and Sean A Munson. 2018. Values, identity, and social translucence: Neurodiverse student teams in higher education. In Proceedings of the 2018 chi conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–13.Google ScholarDigital Library
Recommendations
Designing and Operationalizing a Civic Data Infrastructure in Atlanta's Westside Neighborhoods
CSCW '19 Companion: Companion Publication of the 2019 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social ComputingMy doctoral research aims to understand if civic data infrastructures can be designed and operationalized to serve the data equity and advocacy needs of minoritized communities. I do this using a combination of participatory and ethnographic research ...
Designing an Online Civic Engagement Platform: Balancing "More" vs. "Better" Participation in Complex Public Policymaking
A new form of online citizen participation in government decisionmaking has arisen in the United States (U.S.) under the Obama Administration. "Civic Participation 2.0" attempts to use Web 2.0 information and communication technologies to enable wider ...
Foregrounding Values through Public Participation: Eliciting Values of Citizens in the Context of Mobility Data Donation
MuC '23: Proceedings of Mensch und Computer 2023Citizen science (CS) projects are conducted with interested volunteers and have already shown promise for large-scale scientific research. However, CS tends to cultivate the sharing of large amounts of data. Towards this, our research aims to understand ...
Comments