发表机构
University of Helsinki; Aalto University（赫尔辛基大学; 阿尔托大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本研究借鉴正义地图框架，分析人机交互中正义的多元概念，通过四个案例展示不同正义观，并呼吁HCI领域以多元视角审慎处理争议性概念，避免学术沉默。
AI 中文摘要
人机交互领域日益关注并推动正义。然而，此类工作往往未以多元视角看待正义。正义并非单一概念：政治哲学提供了多种公认且相互不兼容的正义观念。为厘清这些含义，我们借鉴了正义地图，这是一个识别出西方哲学思想中六种不同正义观念的哲学框架。我们将此框架应用于四个案例，以说明不同的社会正义方法：COMPAS系统、食品民主、绅士化（中产阶级化）和机器人技术。我们的分析表明，每个案例均已反映了地图上的某一立场，但更重要的是，人们也可以将案例适配到其他观念，从而产生截然不同的系统和分析。我们讨论了人机交互如何更审慎地处理此类争议性概念，并警告说，缺乏多元理解，学术话语将面临沉默螺旋的风险。
英文摘要
Human-computer interaction increasingly studies and promotes justice. Often, this work does not treat justice through a pluralistic lens Justice, however, is not one thing: political philosophy offers several well-established, mutually incompatible conceptions of it. To navigate these meanings, we draw on a map of justice, a philosophical framework identifying six distinct conceptions of justice situated throughout (Western) philosophical thought. We apply this framework to four cases that illustrate different approaches to social justice: the COMPAS system, food democracy, gentrification, and robotics. Our analysis shows that each case already reflects a position on the map, but more importantly, one might adapt the case to other conceptions as well, leading to very different systems and analyses. We discuss how HCI might engage more carefully with such contested concepts, and warn that without pluralistic understanding, academic discourse risks a spiral of silence.
