MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2315603950

Ethics in the Cultural and Educational Industries

2017· article· en· W2315603950 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Juris Dilevko

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Information Ethics · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLaw, Rights, and Freedoms
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésVariety (cybernetics)HappinessSociologyLaw and economicsPaternalismArgument (complex analysis)Social psychologyLawPositive economicsPsychologyPolitical scienceEconomics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The Politics of NudgingThe year 2008 may very well have been the year of the nudge, to judge from the title of controversial book about the seemingly esoteric topic of behavioral economics.i Synthesizing results from decades of research in psychology, sociology, and economics, Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein asserted that individuals, for variety of reasons, do not necessarily make decisions that are in their best interests when it comes to matters of health, wealth, and happiness. As result, those individuals should be nudged by into making better Specifically, choice architects should employ variety of subtle techniques-small wording changes on documents, tax-code deductions, opt-out formulas instead of opt-in formulas, and so on-to try to influence people's behavior in order to make their lives longer, healthier, and better. Thaler and Sunstein called their approach libertarian paternalism-a label that suggested level of coercion that some people found uncomfortable, given the connotations of each of those terms. But let us look at their argument closely and apply it to public libraries-once bastions of meaningful learning, but now slip-sliding into gaudy entertainment venues and social-gathering places.Thaler and Sunstein's foundational insight was that there is no such thing as neutral design because any policy or procedure influences people's behaviors in one way or another, often without their knowing it. Two examples clarify their point. We all know that cellphones have numerous features with numerous options for each feature, but because single option is set as the default for each feature, the vast majority of cellphone owners use that pre-determined default. We succumb to inertia. We also know that eating healthful foods is good thing, but the arrangement of food on the shelves of cafeteria-carrots and broccoli on below-eye level shelf, for example, or desserts at the beginning of the line-means that we will load up on desserts and avoid vegetables. We succumb to convenience.Mundane as they may appear, the two above situations were placed before us-staged, as it were-by architect, defined as anyone who has the responsibility for organizing the context in which people make decisions. In other words, choices about organizational context have already been made by someone else before any given person makes an individual decision about what he or she wants, does, or thinks. Thus choice architects are crucial, and they impact our lives more than we know or suspect: the physician describing alternative treatments to patients; parents discussing educational options with their children; and employers paying their employees on weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly basis.Not surprisingly, governments and quasi-governmental entities are strong proponents of nudging. In the United States and Canada, many utilities have installed so-called smart meters in homes and workplaces, offering reduced rates for energy consumption during off-peak evening hours and weekends, but high rates for consumption during on-peak weekday morning and afternoon hours. In Great Britain, officials mandated the creation of Behavioral Insights Team in 20i0, aka the nudge unit.2 In three short years, the unit implemented measures that increased people's willingness to donate organs, pay court fines, give to charities, and participate in retirementsavings plans, to name but few successes. Interest in the program grew exponentially, with all British civil servants being trained in behavioral economics and a new team in the White House planning to run policy trials inspired in part by Britain's program.It's imperative to note that no one is being forced to consume energy sources only during off-peak hours, nor to be more generous with regard to charities; rather, individuals are offered incentives-lower utility rates and larger tax deductions, for instance-to act in manner that not only benefits them, but also society at large, which leads us back to public libraries. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,014
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,015
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,072

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0140,014
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0150,081
Communication savante0,0130,008
Science ouverte0,0010,006
Intégrité de la recherche0,0070,009
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,171
Tête enseignante GPT0,429
Écart entre enseignants0,258 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Information EthicsMême sujetLaw, Rights, and FreedomsTravaux en français237 207