skip to main content
10.1145/3593013.3594023acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfacctConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Can Workers Meaningfully Consent to Workplace Wellbeing Technologies?

Published: 12 June 2023 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    Sensing technologies deployed in the workplace can unobtrusively collect detailed data about individual activities and group interactions that are otherwise difficult to capture. A hopeful application of these technologies is that they can help businesses and workers optimize productivity and wellbeing. However, given the inherent and structural power dynamics in the workplace, the prevalent approach of accepting tacit compliance to monitor work activities rather than seeking workers’ meaningful consent raises privacy and ethical concerns. This paper unpacks challenges workers face when consenting to workplace wellbeing technologies. Using a hypothetical case to prompt reflection among six multi-stakeholder focus groups involving 15 participants, we explored participants’ expectations and capacity to consent to these technologies. We sketched possible interventions that could better support meaningful consent to workplace wellbeing technologies, by drawing on critical computing and feminist scholarship—which reframes consent from a purely individual choice to a structural condition experienced at the individual level that needs to be freely given, reversible, informed, enthusiastic, and specific (FRIES). The focus groups revealed how workers are vulnerable to “meaningless” consent—as they may be subject to power dynamics that minimize their ability to withhold consent and may thus experience an erosion of autonomy in their workplace, also undermining the value of data gathered in the name of “wellbeing.” To meaningfully consent, participants wanted changes to how the technology works and is being used, as well as to the policies and practices surrounding the technology. Our mapping of what prevents workers from meaningfully consenting to workplace wellbeing technologies (challenges) and what they require to do so (interventions) illustrates how the lack of meaningful consent is a structural problem requiring socio-technical solutions.

    References

    [1]
    Rediet Abebe, Solon Barocas, Jon Kleinberg, Karen Levy, Manish Raghavan, and David G Robinson. 2020. Roles for computing in social change. In Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 252–260.
    [2]
    Daniel A Adler, Emily Tseng, Khatiya C Moon, John Q Young, John M Kane, Emanuel Moss, David C Mohr, and Tanzeem Choudhury. 2022. Burnout and the Quantified Workplace: Tensions around Personal Sensing Interventions for Stress in Resident Physicians. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CSCW2 (2022), 1–48.
    [3]
    Asmara Afzal, Mehdi Hussain, Shahzad Saleem, M Khuram Shahzad, Anthony TS Ho, and Ki-Hyun Jung. 2021. Encrypted Network Traffic Analysis of Secure Instant Messaging Application: A Case Study of Signal Messenger App. Applied Sciences 11, 17 (2021), 7789.
    [4]
    Ifeoma Ajunwa, Kate Crawford, and Jason Schultz. 2017. Limitless worker surveillance. Calif. L. Rev. 105 (2017), 735.
    [5]
    McKane Andrus, Elena Spitzer, Jeffrey Brown, and Alice Xiang. 2021. What we can’t measure, we can’t understand: challenges to demographic data procurement in the pursuit of fairness. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 249–260.
    [6]
    Rishab Bailey, Smriti Parsheera, Faiza Rahman, and Renuka Sane. 2021. Disclosures in privacy policies: Does "notice and consent" work?Loy. Consumer L. Rev. 33 (2021), 1.
    [7]
    Chelsea Barabas, Colin Doyle, JB Rubinovitz, and Karthik Dinakar. 2020. Studying up: reorienting the study of algorithmic fairness around issues of power. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 167–176.
    [8]
    Solon Barocas and Helen Nissenbaum. 2014. Big data’s end run around anonymity and consent. Privacy, big data, and the public good: Frameworks for engagement 1 (2014), 44–75.
    [9]
    Lisa Feldman Barrett, Ralph Adolphs, Stacy Marsella, Aleix M Martinez, and Seth D Pollak. 2019. Emotional expressions reconsidered: Challenges to inferring emotion from human facial movements. Psychological science in the public interest 20, 1 (2019), 1–68.
    [10]
    Mehrab Bin Morshed, Javier Hernandez, Daniel McDuff, Jina Suh, Esther Howe, 2022. Advancing the Understanding and Measurement of Workplace Stress in Remote Information Workers from Passive Sensors and Behavioral Data. In 2022 10th International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction (ACII). IEEE.
    [11]
    Mehrab Bin Morshed, Koustuv Saha, Richard Li, Sidney K. D’Mello, Munmun De Choudhury, Gregory D. Abowd, and Thomas Plötz. 2019. Prediction of Mood Instability with Passive Sensing. PACM IMWUT (2019).
    [12]
    Sarah Bird, Solon Barocas, Kate Crawford, Fernando Diaz, and Hanna Wallach. 2016. Exploring or exploiting? Social and ethical implications of autonomous experimentation in AI. In Workshop on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency in Machine Learning.
    [13]
    Matthew T Bodie. 2022. Employers as Information Fiduciaries. Santa Clara Law Review 63 (2022).
    [14]
    Vanessa K Bohns and Rachel Schlund. 2020. Consent is an organizational behavior issue. Research in Organizational Behavior 40 (2020), 100138.
    [15]
    Scott A Cambo, Daniel Avrahami, and Matthew L Lee. 2017. BreakSense: Combining physiological and location sensing to promote mobility during work-breaks. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3595–3607.
    [16]
    Chia-Fang Chung, Nanna Gorm, Irina A Shklovski, and Sean Munson. 2017. Finding the right fit: understanding health tracking in workplace wellness programs. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 4875–4886.
    [17]
    Julie E Cohen. 2019. Turning privacy inside out. Theoretical inquiries in law 20, 1 (2019), 1–31.
    [18]
    Marios Constantinides and Daniele Quercia. 2022. Good Intentions, Bad Inventions: How Employees Judge Pervasive Technologies in the Workplace. IEEE Pervasive Computing (2022).
    [19]
    Shanley Corvite, Kat Roemmich, Tillie Rosenberg, and Nazanin Andalibi. 2022. Data Subjects’ Perspectives on Emotion Artificial Intelligence Use in the Workplace: A Relational Ethics Lens. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (2022).
    [20]
    Kate Crawford. 2021. Time to regulate AI that interprets human emotions. Nature 592, 7853 (2021), 167–167.
    [21]
    Jena Nicols Curtis and Susan Burnett. 2017. Affirmative consent: What do college student leaders think about “yes means yes” as the standard for sexual behavior?American Journal of Sexuality Education 12, 3 (2017), 201–214.
    [22]
    Bart Custers, Simone van der Hof, and Bart Schermer. 2014. Privacy expectations of social media users: The role of informed consent in privacy policies. Policy & Internet 6, 3 (2014), 268–295.
    [23]
    Anupam Das, Martin Degeling, Daniel Smullen, and Norman Sadeh. 2018. Personalized privacy assistants for the internet of things: Providing users with notice and choice. IEEE Pervasive Computing 17, 3 (2018), 35–46.
    [24]
    Vedant Das Swain 2019. A Multisensor Person-Centered Approach to Understand the Role of Daily Activities in Job Performance with Organizational Personas. PACM IMWUT (2019).
    [25]
    Vedant Das Swain, Victor Chen, Shrija Mishra, Stephen M Mattingly, Gregory D Abowd, and Munmun De Choudhury. 2022. Semantic Gap in Predicting Mental Wellbeing through Passive Sensing. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–16.
    [26]
    Vedant Das Swain, Lan Gao, William A Wood, Srikruthi C Matli, Gregory D Abowd, and Munmun De Choudhury. 2023. Algorithmic Power or Punishment: Information Worker Perspectives on Passive Sensing Enabled AI Phenotyping of Performance and Wellbeing. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
    [27]
    Vedant Das Swain, Javier Hernandez, Brian Houck, Koustuv Saha, Jina Suh, Ahad Chaudhry, Tenny Cho, Wendy Guo, Shamsi Iqbal, and Mary Czerwinski. 2023. Focused Time Saves Nine: Evaluating Computer-Assisted Protected Time for Hybrid Information Work. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
    [28]
    Vedant Das Swain, Manikanta D. Reddy, Kari Anne Nies, Louis Tay, Munmun De Choudhury, and Gregory D. Abowd. 2019. Birds of a Feather Clock Together: A Study of Person–Organization Fit Through Latent Activity Routines. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. InteractCSCW (2019).
    [29]
    Vedant Das Swain, Koustuv Saha, Gregory D Abowd, and Munmun De Choudhury. 2020. Social media and ubiquitous technologies for remote worker wellbeing and productivity in a post-pandemic world. In 2020 IEEE Second International Conference on Cognitive Machine Intelligence (CogMI). IEEE, 121–130.
    [30]
    Niall Docherty and Asia J Biega. 2022. (Re) Politicizing Digital Well-Being: Beyond User Engagements. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.
    [31]
    Isabel Ebert, Isabelle Wildhaber, and Jeremias Adams-Prassl. 2021. Big Data in the workplace: Privacy Due Diligence as a human rights-based approach to employee privacy protection. Big Data & Society 8, 1 (2021), 20539517211013051.
    [32]
    Daniel A Epstein, Daniel Avrahami, and Jacob T Biehl. 2016. Taking 5: Work-breaks, productivity, and opportunities for personal informatics for knowledge workers. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 673–684.
    [33]
    Breanne Fahs and Sara I McClelland. 2016. When sex and power collide: An argument for critical sexuality studies. The journal of sex research 53, 4-5 (2016), 392–416.
    [34]
    Jaclyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti. 2019. Yes means yes!: Visions of female sexual power and a world without rape. Seal Press.
    [35]
    Alexandra Giannopoulou. 2020. Algorithmic systems: the consent is in the detail?Internet Policy Review 9, 1 (2020).
    [36]
    Richard Gomer, M. C. schraefel, and Enrico Gerding. 2014. Consenting Agents: Semi-Autonomous Interactions for Ubiquitous Consent. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct Publication (Seattle, Washington) (UbiComp ’14 Adjunct). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 653–658. https://doi.org/10.1145/2638728.2641682
    [37]
    Nanna Gorm and Irina Shklovski. 2016. Sharing steps in the workplace: Changing privacy concerns over time. In proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 4315–4319.
    [38]
    Erhardt Grae. 2020. The responsibility to not design and the need for citizen professionalism. (2020).
    [39]
    Douglas Heaven. 2020. Why faces don’t always tell the truth about feelings. Nature 578, 7796 (2020), 502–505.
    [40]
    Joseph Henrich, Steven J Heine, and Ara Norenzayan. 2010. Most people are not WEIRD. Nature 466, 7302 (2010), 29–29.
    [41]
    Naja Holten Møller, Gina Neff, Jakob Grue Simonsen, Jonas Christoffer Villumsen, and Pernille Bjørn. 2021. Can Workplace Tracking Ever Empower? Collective Sensemaking for the Responsible Use of Sensor Data at Work. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, GROUP (2021), 1–21.
    [42]
    Soheil Human and Florian Cech. 2021. A human-centric perspective on digital consenting: The case of gafam. In Human Centred Intelligent Systems: Proceedings of KES-HCIS 2020 Conference. Springer, 139–159.
    [43]
    Terry Humphreys and Ed Herold. 2007. Sexual consent in heterosexual relationships: Development of a new measure. Sex Roles 57 (2007), 305–315.
    [44]
    Jane Im, Jill Dimond, Melody Berton, Una Lee, Katherine Mustelier, Mark S Ackerman, and Eric Gilbert. 2021. Yes: Affirmative consent as a theoretical framework for understanding and imagining social platforms. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.
    [45]
    Lucas D Introna. 2000. Workplace surveillance, privacy and distributive justice. Acm Sigcas Computers and Society 30, 4 (2000), 33–39.
    [46]
    Abigail Z Jacobs and Hanna Wallach. 2021. Measurement and fairness. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 375–385.
    [47]
    Eun Seo Jo and Timnit Gebru. 2020. Lessons from archives: Strategies for collecting sociocultural data in machine learning. In Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 306–316.
    [48]
    Meg Leta Jones, Ellen Kaufman, and Elizabeth Edenberg. 2018. AI and the Ethics of Automating Consent. IEEE Security & Privacy 16, 3 (2018), 64–72.
    [49]
    Arvid Kappas. 2010. Smile when you read this, whether you like it or not: Conceptual challenges to affect detection. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing 1, 1 (2010), 38–41.
    [50]
    Harmanpreet Kaur, Daniel McDuff, Alex C Williams, Jaime Teevan, and Shamsi T Iqbal. 2022. “I Didn’t Know I Looked Angry”: Characterizing Observed Emotion and Reported Affect at Work. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.
    [51]
    Harmanpreet Kaur, Alex C Williams, Daniel McDuff, Mary Czerwinski, Jaime Teevan, and Shamsi T Iqbal. 2020. Optimizing for happiness and productivity: Modeling opportune moments for transitions and breaks at work. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–15.
    [52]
    Anna Kawakami, Shreya Chowdhary, Shamsi T Iqbal, Q Vera Liao, Alexandra Olteanu, Jina Suh, and Koustuv Saha. 2023. Sensing Wellbeing in the Workplace, Why and For Whom? Envisioning Impacts with Organizational Stakeholders. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (CSCW) (2023).
    [53]
    Anja Kovacs and Tripti Jain. 2020. Informed Consent-Said Who? A Feminist Perspective on Principles of Consent in the Age of Embodied Data. A Feminist Perspective on Principles of Consent in the Age of Embodied Data (November 2020) (2020).
    [54]
    Giuseppe La Torre, Alessia Esposito, Iliana Sciarra, and Marta Chiappetta. 2019. Definition, symptoms and risk of techno-stress: a systematic review. International archives of occupational and environmental health 92, 1 (2019), 13–35.
    [55]
    Fanny Larradet, Radoslaw Niewiadomski, Giacinto Barresi, Darwin G Caldwell, and Leonardo S Mattos. 2020. Toward emotion recognition from physiological signals in the wild: approaching the methodological issues in real-life data collection. Frontiers in psychology 11 (2020), 1111.
    [56]
    Una Lee and Dann Toliver. 2017. Building Consentful Tech. (2017). http://www.consentfultech.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Building-Consentful-Tech.pdf
    [57]
    P Litchfield. 2021. Workplace wellbeing. Perspectives in public health 141, 1 (2021), 11–12.
    [58]
    Craig R Littler. 1978. Understanding taylorism. British Journal of Sociology (1978), 185–202.
    [59]
    Ewa Luger, Stuart Moran, and Tom Rodden. 2013. Consent for all: revealing the hidden complexity of terms and conditions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. 2687–2696.
    [60]
    Ewa Luger and Tom Rodden. 2013. Terms of agreement: Rethinking consent for pervasive computing. Interacting with Computers 25, 3 (2013), 229–241.
    [61]
    Ewa Luger and Tom Rodden. 2014. Sustaining Consent through Agency: A Framework for Future Development. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct Publication (Seattle, Washington) (UbiComp ’14 Adjunct). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 659–664. https://doi.org/10.1145/2638728.2641680
    [62]
    Kateryna Maltseva. 2020. Wearables in the workplace: The brave new world of employee engagement. Business Horizons 63, 4 (2020), 493–505.
    [63]
    Peter Mantello, Manh-Tung Ho, Minh-Hoang Nguyen, and Quan-Hoang Vuong. 2021. Bosses without a heart: socio-demographic and cross-cultural determinants of attitude toward Emotional AI in the workplace. AI & society (2021), 1–23.
    [64]
    Gloria Mark, Shamsi Iqbal, Mary Czerwinski, and Paul Johns. 2014. Capturing the mood: facebook and face-to-face encounters in the workplace. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing. ACM, 1082–1094.
    [65]
    Gloria Mark, Shamsi T Iqbal, Mary Czerwinski, Paul Johns, Akane Sano, and Yuliya Lutchyn. 2016. Email duration, batching and self-interruption: Patterns of email use on productivity and stress. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1717–1728.
    [66]
    Gloria Mark, Andrew L Kun, Sean Rintel, and Abigail Sellen. 2022. Introduction to this special issue: the future of remote work: responses to the pandemic. Human–Computer Interaction 37, 5 (2022), 397–403.
    [67]
    Afra Mashhadi, Fahim Kawsar, Akhil Mathur, Casey Dugan, and N Sadat Shami. 2016. Let’s talk about the quantified workplace. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing Companion. 522–528.
    [68]
    Stephen M Mattingly 2019. The Tesserae Project: Large-Scale, Longitudinal, In Situ, Multimodal Sensing of Information Workers. In CHI Ext. Abstracts.
    [69]
    Shayan Mirjafari, Kizito Masaba, Ted Grover, Weichen Wang, Pino Audia, Andrew T. Campbell, Nitesh V. Chawla, Vedant Das Swain, Munmun De Choudhury, Anind K. Dey, and et al.2019. Differentiating Higher and Lower Job Performers in the Workplace Using Mobile Sensing. Proc. ACM IMWUT (2019).
    [70]
    Tanushree Mitra, Michael Muller, N Sadat Shami, Abbas Golestani, and Mikhil Masli. 2017. Spread of Employee Engagement in a Large Organizational Network: A Longitudinal Analysis. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 1, CSCW (2017), 81.
    [71]
    Adam D Moore. 2000. Employee monitoring and computer technology: evaluative surveillance v. privacy. Business Ethics Quarterly 10, 3 (2000), 697–709.
    [72]
    Phoebe Moore and Andrew Robinson. 2016. The quantified self: What counts in the neoliberal workplace. new media & society 18, 11 (2016), 2774–2792.
    [73]
    Stuart Moran, Ewa Luger, and Tom Rodden. 2014. An Emerging Tool Kit for Attaining Informed Consent in UbiComp. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct Publication (Seattle, Washington) (UbiComp ’14 Adjunct). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 635–639. https://doi.org/10.1145/2638728.2641677
    [74]
    Prasanth Murali, Javier Hernandez, Daniel McDuff, Kael Rowan, Jina Suh, and Mary Czerwinski. 2021. Affectivespotlight: Facilitating the communication of affective responses from audience members during online presentations. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.
    [75]
    Subigya Nepal, Shayan Mirjafari, Gonzalo J Martinez, Pino Audia, Aaron Striegel, and Andrew T Campbell. 2020. Detecting job promotion in information workers using mobile sensing. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 4, 3 (2020), 1–28.
    [76]
    Josef Nguyen and Bonnie Ruberg. 2020. Challenges of designing consent: Consent mechanics in video games as models for interactive user agency. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.
    [77]
    Helen Nissenbaum. 2009. Privacy in context. In Privacy in Context. Stanford University Press.
    [78]
    Chris Norval, Kristin Cornelius, Jennifer Cobbe, and Jatinder Singh. 2022. Disclosure by Design: Designing information disclosures to support meaningful transparency and accountability. In 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 679–690.
    [79]
    Alexandra Olteanu, Carlos Castillo, Fernando Diaz, and Emre Kiciman. 2019. Social data: Biases, methodological pitfalls, and ethical boundaries. Frontiers in Big Data 2 (2019), 13.
    [80]
    Michelle O’Reilly, Nicola Parker, and Ian Hutchby. 2011. Ongoing processes of managing consent: The empirical ethics of using video-recording in clinical practice and research. Clinical Ethics 6, 4 (2011), 179–185.
    [81]
    Christopher O’Neill. 2017. Taylorism, the European science of work, and the quantified self at work. Science, Technology, & Human Values 42, 4 (2017), 600–621.
    [82]
    Elin Palm. 2009. Securing privacy at work: the importance of contextualized consent. Ethics and Information Technology 11 (2009), 233–241.
    [83]
    Planned Parenthood. 2020. Sexual consent.
    [84]
    Hyanghee Park, Daehwan Ahn, Kartik Hosanagar, and Joonhwan Lee. 2021. Human-AI Interaction in Human Resource Management: Understanding Why Employees Resist Algorithmic Evaluation at Workplaces and How to Mitigate Burdens. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–15.
    [85]
    Samir Passi and Solon Barocas. 2019. Problem formulation and fairness. In Proceedings of the conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency.
    [86]
    Paz Peña and Joana Varon. 2019. Consent to our Data Bodies lessons from feminist theories to enforce data protection. Coding Rights 25 (2019).
    [87]
    Kiran K Rachuri, Cecilia Mascolo, Mirco Musolesi, and Peter J Rentfrow. 2011. Sociablesense: exploring the trade-offs of adaptive sampling and computation offloading for social sensing. In Proceedings of the 17th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking. 73–84.
    [88]
    Inioluwa Deborah Raji, I Elizabeth Kumar, Aaron Horowitz, and Andrew Selbst. 2022. The Fallacy of AI Functionality. In ACM FAccT.
    [89]
    Consumer Reports. 2022. CR’s Comments to the Office of Science and Technology Policy on AI-enabled Biometric Processing. https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/crs-comments-to-the-office-of-science-and-technology-policy-on-ai-enabled-biometric-processing/
    [90]
    Pablo Robles-Granda, Suwen Lin, Xian Wu, Gonzalo J Martinez, Stephen M Mattingly, Edward Moskal, Aaron Striegel, Nitesh V Chawla, Sidney D’Mello, Julie Gregg, 2021. Jointly predicting job performance, personality, cognitive ability, affect, and well-being. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 16, 2 (2021), 46–61.
    [91]
    Kat Roemmich and Nazanin Andalibi. 2021. Data subjects’ conceptualizations of and attitudes toward automatic emotion recognition-enabled wellbeing interventions on social media. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW2 (2021), 1–34.
    [92]
    Koustuv Saha and Shamsi T Iqbal. 2023. Focus Time for Wellbeing and Work Engagement of Information Workers. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts.
    [93]
    Koustuv Saha, Manikanta D Reddy, Stephen Mattingly, Edward Moskal, Anusha Sirigiri, and Munmun De Choudhury. 2019. Libra: On linkedin based role ambiguity and its relationship with wellbeing and job performance. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (2019), 1–30.
    [94]
    Koustuv Saha, Asra Yousuf, Louis Hickman, Pranshu Gupta, Louis Tay, and Munmun De Choudhury. 2021. A Social Media Study on Demographic Differences in Perceived Job Satisfaction. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Ineraction (CSCW) (2021).
    [95]
    Florian Schaule, Jan Ole Johanssen, Bernd Bruegge, and Vivian Loftness. 2018. Employing consumer wearables to detect office workers’ cognitive load for interruption management. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 2, 1 (2018), 1–20.
    [96]
    Bart W Schermer, Bart Custers, and Simone Van der Hof. 2014. The crisis of consent: How stronger legal protection may lead to weaker consent in data protection. Ethics and Information Technology 16, 2 (2014), 171–182.
    [97]
    Christie Napa Scollon, Chu-Kim Prieto, and Ed Diener. 2009. Experience sampling: promises and pitfalls, strength and weaknesses. In Assessing well-being. Springer, 157–180.
    [98]
    Daniel J Solove. 2012. Introduction: Privacy self-management and the consent dilemma. Harv. L. Rev. 126 (2012), 1880.
    [99]
    Luke Stark and Jesse Hoey. 2021. The ethics of emotion in artificial intelligence systems. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 782–793.
    [100]
    Luke Stark, Amanda Stanhaus, and Denise L Anthony. 2020. “I don’t want someone to watch me while I’m working”: Gendered views of facial recognition technology in workplace surveillance. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 71, 9 (2020), 1074–1088.
    [101]
    Yolande Strengers, Jathan Sadowski, Zhuying Li, Anna Shimshak, and Florian ’Floyd’Mueller. 2021. What Can HCI Learn from Sexual Consent? A Feminist Process of Embodied Consent for Interactions with Emerging Technologies. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.
    [102]
    Harriet JA Teare, Megan Prictor, and Jane Kaye. 2021. Reflections on dynamic consent in biomedical research: the story so far. European journal of human genetics 29, 4 (2021), 649–656.
    [103]
    Roger Tourangeau, Lance J Rips, and Kenneth Rasinski. 2000. The psychology of survey response. Cambridge University Press.
    [104]
    Joana Varon and Paz Peña. 2021. Artificial intelligence and consent: A feminist anti-colonial critique. Internet Policy Review 10, 4 (2021), 1–25.
    [105]
    Janet Vertesi. 2014. Seamful spaces: Heterogeneous infrastructures in interaction. Science, Technology, & Human Values 39, 2 (2014), 264–284.
    [106]
    Rui Wang, Fanglin Chen, Zhenyu Chen, Tianxing Li, Gabriella Harari, Stefanie Tignor, Xia Zhou, Dror Ben-Zeev, and Andrew T Campbell. 2014. StudentLife: assessing mental health, academic performance and behavioral trends of college students using smartphones. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM international joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing. 3–14.
    [107]
    Steven L Willborn. 2005. Consenting Employees: Workplace Privacy and the Role of Consent. La. L. Rev. 66 (2005), 975.
    [108]
    Ziang Xiao, Tiffany Wenting Li, Karrie Karahalios, and Hari Sundaram. 2023. Inform the Uninformed: Improving Online Informed Consent Reading with an AI-Powered Chatbot. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–17.
    [109]
    Longqi Yang, David Holtz, Sonia Jaffe, Siddharth Suri, Shilpi Sinha, Jeffrey Weston, Connor Joyce, Neha Shah, Kevin Sherman, Brent Hecht, 2022. The effects of remote work on collaboration among information workers. Nature human behaviour 6, 1 (2022), 43–54.
    [110]
    Camellia Zakaria, Rajesh Balan, and Youngki Lee. 2019. StressMon: scalable detection of perceived stress and depression using passive sensing of changes in work Routines and group interactions. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (2019), 1–29.
    [111]
    Kathryn Zickuhr. 2021. Workplace Surveillance Is Becoming the New Normal for US Workers. Washington Center for Equitable Growth. https://equitablegrowth. org/research-paper/workplace-surveillance-is-becomingthe-new-normal-for-us-workers/. Institute for Research on Labor and Employment University of California, Berkeley 2521 (2021), 94720–5555.

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Examining Algorithmic Metrics and their Effects through the Lens of ReactivityProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3660676(3179-3192)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
    • (2024)Designing for Agonism: 12 Workers' Perspectives on Contesting Technology FuturesProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36410018:CSCW1(1-25)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
    • (2024)Towards Inclusive Futures for Worker WellbeingProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36374148:CSCW1(1-32)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
    • Show More Cited By

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    FAccT '23: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency
    June 2023
    1929 pages
    ISBN:9798400701924
    DOI:10.1145/3593013
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 12 June 2023

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. data governance
    2. ethics
    3. power
    4. privacy
    5. sensing
    6. workplace

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    FAccT '23

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)360
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)31

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Examining Algorithmic Metrics and their Effects through the Lens of ReactivityProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3660676(3179-3192)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
    • (2024)Designing for Agonism: 12 Workers' Perspectives on Contesting Technology FuturesProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36410018:CSCW1(1-25)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
    • (2024)Towards Inclusive Futures for Worker WellbeingProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36374148:CSCW1(1-32)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
    • (2024)A Systematic Review of Biometric Monitoring in the Workplace: Analyzing Socio-technical Harms in Development, Deployment and UseProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3630106.3658945(920-932)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2024
    • (2024)A Framework for Exploring the Consequences of AI-Mediated Enterprise Knowledge Access and Identifying Risks to WorkersProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3630106.3658900(207-220)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2024
    • (2024)Data Feminism for AIProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3630106.3658543(100-112)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2024
    • (2024)Sensible and Sensitive AI for Worker Wellbeing: Factors that Inform Adoption and Resistance for Information WorkersProceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642716(1-30)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
    • (2024)The Impact of Social Norms on Hybrid Workers’ Well-Being: A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Japan and the United StatesProceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3641928(1-19)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
    • (2023)Workers’ right to the subject: The social relations of data productionConvergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies10.1177/13548565231199971Online publication date: 17-Nov-2023
    • (2023)Future of Workplace Conversational AI-driven Personal Assistants: Promises and PerilsProceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of the Forum for Information Retrieval Evaluation10.1145/3632754.3632939(133-135)Online publication date: 15-Dec-2023
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media