BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Colin M. Gray

Colin M. Gray contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Human-Computer Interactioncs.CYSocial and Information Networks

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Let's Talk About Socio-Technical Angst: Tracing the History and Evolution of Dark Patterns on Twitter from 2010-2021

Designers' use of deceptive and manipulative design practices have become increasingly ubiquitous, impacting users' ability to make choices that respect their agency and autonomy. These practices have been popularly defined through the term "dark patterns" which has gained attention from designers, privacy scholars, and more recently, even legal scholars and regulators. The increased interest in the term and underpinnings of dark patterns across a range of sociotechnical practitioners intrigued us to study the evolution of the concept, to potentially speculate the future trajectory of conversations around dark patterns. In this paper, we examine the history and evolution of the Twitter discourse through #darkpatterns from its inception in June 2010 until April 2021, using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to describe how this discourse has changed over time. We frame the evolution of this discourse as an emergent transdisciplinary conversation that connects multiple disciplinary perspectives through the shared concept of dark patterns, whereby these participants engage in a conversation marked by socio-technical angst in order to identify and fight back against deceptive design practices. We discuss the potential future trajectories of this discourse and opportunities for further scholarship at the intersection of design, policy, and activism.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Surveying the Landscape of Ethics-Focused Design Methods

Over the past decade, HCI researchers, design researchers, and practitioners have increasingly addressed ethics-focused issues through a range of theoretical, methodological and pragmatic contributions to the field. While many forms of design knowledge have been proposed and described, we focus explicitly on knowledge that has been codified as "methods," which we define as any supports for everyday work practices of designers. In this paper, we identify, analyze, and map a collection of 63 existing ethics-focused methods intentionally designed for ethical impact. We present a content analysis, providing a descriptive record of how they operationalize ethics, their intended audience or context of use, their "core" or "script," and the means by which these methods are formulated, articulated, and languaged. Building on these results, we provide an initial definition of ethics-focused methods, identifying potential opportunities for the development of future methods to support design practice and research.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Dark Patterns and the Legal Requirements of Consent Banners: An Interaction Criticism Perspective

User engagement with data privacy and security through consent banners has become a ubiquitous part of interacting with internet services. While previous work has addressed consent banners from either interaction design, legal, and ethics-focused perspectives, little research addresses the connections among multiple disciplinary approaches, including tensions and opportunities that transcend disciplinary boundaries. In this paper, we draw together perspectives and commentary from HCI, design, privacy and data protection, and legal research communities, using the language and strategies of "dark patterns" to perform an interaction criticism reading of three different types of consent banners. Our analysis builds upon designer, interface, user, and social context lenses to raise tensions and synergies that arise together in complex, contingent, and conflicting ways in the act of designing consent banners. We conclude with opportunities for transdisciplinary dialogue across legal, ethical, computer science, and interactive systems scholarship to translate matters of ethical concern into public policy.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Design Judgment in Data Visualization Practice

Data visualization is becoming an increasingly popular field of design practice. Although many studies have highlighted the knowledge required for effective data visualization design, their focus has largely been on formal knowledge and logical decision-making processes that can be abstracted and codified. Less attention has been paid to the more situated and personal ways of knowing that are prevalent in all design activity. In this study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with data visualization practitioners during which they were asked to describe the practical and situated aspects of their design processes. Using a philosophical framework of design judgment from Nelson and Stolterman [23], we analyzed the transcripts to describe the volume and complex layering of design judgments that are used by data visualization practitioners as they describe and interrogate their work. We identify aspects of data visualization practice that require further investigation beyond notions of rational, model- or principle-directed decision-making processes.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

End User Accounts of Dark Patterns as Felt Manipulation

Manipulation defines many of our experiences as a consumer, including subtle nudges and overt advertising campaigns that seek to gain our attention and money. With the advent of digital services that can continuously optimize online experiences to favor stakeholder requirements, increasingly designers and developers make use of "dark patterns"---forms of manipulation that prey on human psychology---to encourage certain behaviors and discourage others in ways that present unequal value to the end user. In this paper, we provide an account of end user perceptions of manipulation that builds on and extends notions of dark patterns. We report on the results of a survey of users conducted in English and Mandarin Chinese (n=169), including follow-up interviews from nine survey respondents. We used a card sorting method to support thematic analysis of responses from each cultural context, identifying both qualitatively-supported insights to describe end users' felt experiences of manipulative products, and a continuum of manipulation. We further support this analysis through a quantitative analysis of survey results and the presentation of vignettes from the interviews. We conclude with implications for future research, considerations for public policy, and guidance on how to further empower and give users autonomy in their experiences with digital services.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access