From Ethical to Equitable Social Media Technologies: Amplifying Underrepresented Youth Voices in Digital Technology Design

References

• Abidin, C. (2018). Internet celebrity: Understanding fame online. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Andersson, H. (2018, July 4). Social media apps are ‘deliberately’ addictive to users. BBC News. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44640959
   Google Scholar
• Andrejevic, M. (2006). The discipline of watching: Detection, risk, and lateral surveillance. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 23, 391–407. doi:10.1080/07393180601046147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. (2017). Instagram and Snapchat are most popular social networks for teens; Black teens are most active on social media, messaging apps. Retrieved from http://apnorc.org/projects/Pages/HTML%20Reports/instagram-and-snapchat-are-most-popular-social-networks-for-teens.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Bakardjieva, M., & Gaden, G. (2012). Web 2.0 technologies of the self. Philosophy & Technology, 25(3), 399–413. doi:10.1007/s13347-011-0032-9
   Google Scholar
• Berman, Y., & Phillips, D. (2001). Information and social quality. Aslib Proceedings, 53(5), 179–188. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000007052
   Google Scholar
• Bijker, W. E., Pinch, W. T., & Hughes, T. (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boczkowski, P. J., Matassi, M., & Mitchelstein, E. (2018). How young users deal with multiple platforms: The role of meaning-making in social media repertoires. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 23(5), 245–259. doi:10.1093/jcmc/zmy012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosker, B. (2016, November). The binge breaker. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/11/the-binge-breaker/501122/
   Google Scholar
• boyd, D. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• boyd, D., Levy, K., & Marwick, A. (2014). The networked nature of algorithmic discrimination. In S. Ganghadaran, V. Eubanks, & S. Barocas (Eds.), Data and discrimination: Collected essays (pp. 53–57). Washington, DC: Open Technology Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Brey, P. (2000). Disclosive computer ethics. Computers and Society, 30(4), 10–16. doi:10.1145/572260.572264
   Google Scholar
• Brock, A. (2012). From the blackhand side: Twitter as a cultural conversation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 529–549. doi:10.1080/08838151.2012.732147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brough, M., Lapsansky, C., Gonzalez, C., Stokes, B., & Bar, F. (2017). Mobile Voices: Design as a method to explore the possibilities and limitations of community participation. Mobile Media & Communication, 6(2), 247–265. doi:10.1177/2050157917737812
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, M., & Kraut, R. E. (2016). The relationship between Facebook use and well-being depends on communication type and tie strength. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(4), 265–281. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12162
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capurro, R. (2008). Intercultural information ethics. In K. E. Himma & H. T. Tavani (Eds.), Handbook of information and computer ethics (pp. 639–665). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Cassell, J., & Cramer, M. (2008). High tech or high risk: Moral panics about girls online. In T. McPherson (Ed.), Digital youth, innovation, and the unexpected (pp. 53–76). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, K., Randall, D. P., Ambrose, A., & Orand, M. (2015). ‘I was bullied too’: Stories of bullying and coping in an online community. Information, Communication & Society, 18(4), 357–375. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2014.952657
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dix, A. (2009). Human-computer interaction. In L. Liu & M. T. Ozsu (Eds.), Encyclopedia of database systems (pp. 1327–1331). New York, NY: Springer US.
   Google Scholar
• Dix, A., Finlay, J., Abowd, G., & Beale, R. (2004). Human-computer interaction (Third edition ed.). Essex, UK: Pearson Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 733–768). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, C., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2011). Autoethnography: An overview. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, 12(1), 273–290.
   Google Scholar
• Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook ‘friends’: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168. doi:10.1111/jcmc.2007.12.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. New York, NY: St Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eyal, N. (2014). Hooked: How to build habit-forming products. New York, NY: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Florini, S. (2014). Tweets, tweeps, and signifyin’: Communication and cultural performance on “Black Twitter”. Television & New Media, 15(3), 223–237. doi:10.1177/1527476413480247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuchs, C., & Obrist, M. (2010). HCI and society: Towards a typology of universal design principles. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 26(6), 638–656. doi:10.1080/10447311003781334
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Co.
   Google Scholar
• Greenhow, C., & Burton, L. (2011). Help from my “friends”: Social capital in the social network sites of low-income students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 45(2), 223–245. doi:10.2190/EC.45.2.f
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halford, S., & Savage, M. (2010). Reconceptualizing digital social inequality. Information, Communication & Society, 13(7), 937–955. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2010.499956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, T. (2016). How technology hijacks people’s minds — From a magician and Google’s design ethicist. Retrieved from http://www.tristanharris.com/2016/05/how-technology-hijacks-peoples-minds%E2%80%8A-%E2%80%8Afrom-a-magician-and-googles-design-ethicist/
   Google Scholar
• Hersh, M. (2013). Science, technology and values: Promoting ethics and social responsibility. AI & Society, 29(2), 167–183. doi:10.1007/s00146-013-0473-z
   Google Scholar
• Hodkinson, P. (2017). Bedrooms and beyond: Youth, identity and privacy on social network sites. New Media & Society, 19(2), 272–288. doi:10.1177/1461444815605454
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holman Jones, S. (2007). Autoethnography. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology(pp. 230–232). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Hongladarom, S. (2011). Personal identity and the self in the online and offline world. Minds and Machines, 21(4), 533–548. doi:10.1007/s11023-011-9255-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hongladarom, S., & Britz, J. (2010). Intercultural information ethics. International Review of Information Ethics, 13, 2–5.
   Google Scholar
• Ito, M., Horst, H. A., Bittanti, M., Stephenson, B. H., Lange, P. G., Pascoe, C. J., … Martínez, K. Z. (2009). Living and learning with new media: Summary of findings from the digital youth project. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kline, R., & Pinch, T. (1996). Users as agents of technological change: The social construction of the automobile in the rural United States. Technology and Culture, 37(4), 763–795. doi:10.2307/3107097
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konopasky, A., & Williams, A. (2016). Connection and control: Case studies of media use among lower-income minority youth and parents. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (1991). Technology is society made durable. In J. Law (Ed.), A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination (pp. 103–131). London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson-Mack, R. (2001). The digital divide: Standing at the intersection of race and technology. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lenhart, A., Smith, A., Anderson, M., Duggan, M., & Perrin, A. (2015). Teens, technology and friendships. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
   Google Scholar
• Li, Q., & Literat, I. (2017). Misuse or misdesign? Yik Yak on college campuses and the moral dimensions of technology design. First Monday, 22(7), Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/6947
   Google Scholar
• Lingel, J., & Golub, A. (2015). In face on Facebook: Brooklyn’s drag community and sociotechnical practices of online communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(5), 536–553. doi:10.1111/jcc4.2015.20.issue-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malik, O. (2014, November 28) Technology and the moral dimension [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://om.co/2014/11/26/technology-and-the-moral-dimension/
   Google Scholar
• Manders-Huits, N. (2010). Practical versus moral identities in identity management. Ethics and Information Technology, 12(1), 43–55. doi:10.1007/s10676-010-9216-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marvin, C. (1990). When old technologies were new: Thinking about electric communication in the late nineteenth century. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marwick, A. E. (2013). Status update: Celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marwick, A. E. (2015). Instafame: Luxury selfies in the attention economy. Public Culture, 27(1 75), 137–160. doi:10.1215/08992363-2798379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, A. E., & boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. doi:10.1177/1461444810365313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, A. E., & boyd, D. (2014). Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media & Society, 16(7), 1051–1067. doi:10.1177/1461444814543995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michikyan, M., & Subrahmanyam, K. (2012). Social networking sites: Implications for youth. In Z. Yan (Ed.), Encyclopedia of cyber behavior (pp. 132–147). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Michikyan, M., Dennis, J., & Subrahmanyam, K. (2015). Can you guess who I am? Real, ideal, and false self-presentation on Facebook among emerging adults. Emerging Adulthood, 3(1), 55–64. doi:10.1177/2167696814532442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noble, S. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York, NY: NYU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oulasvirta, A., Rattenbury, T., Ma, L., & Raita, E. (2012). Habits make smartphone use more pervasive. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 16(1), 105–114. doi:10.1007/s00779-011-0412-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: How the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. New York, NY: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center (2018, February 5). Social media fact sheet. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/social-media/
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, D. (2017, July). Turn off your push notifications. All of them. Wired. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/story/turn-off-your-push-notifications/
   Google Scholar
• Pisha, B., & Coyne, P. (2001). Smart From the Start: The promise of universal design for learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4), 197–203. doi:10.1177/074193250102200402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preiser, W. F., & Smith, K. H. (2011). Universal design at the urban scale. In W. F. Preiser & K. H. Smith (Eds.), Universal Design Handbook (2nd ed., pp. 20.1–20.8). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Reich, J., & Ito, M. (2017). From good intentions to real outcomes: Equity by design in learning technologies. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub. Retrieved from https://clalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/GIROreport_1031.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rice, E., & Barman-Adhikari, A. (2014). Internet and social media use as a resource among homeless youth. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(2), 232–247. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12038
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sacasas, L. M. (2014, November 29) Do artifacts have ethics? [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://thefrailestthing.com/2014/11/29/do-artifacts-have-ethics/
   Google Scholar
• Salehan, M., & Negahban, A. (2013). Social networking on smartphones: When mobile phones become addictive. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2632–2639. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media & Society, 6(3), 341–362. doi:10.1177/1461444804042519
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smahel, D., Wright, M. F., & Cernikova, M. (2014). Classification of online problematic situations in the context of youths’ development. Communications, 39(3), 233–260. doi:10.1515/commun-2014-0111
   Google Scholar
• Spigel, L. (1992). Make room for TV: Television and the family ideal in postwar America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, R., Gilliard-Matthews, S., Dunaev, J., Woods, M. K., & Brawner, B. M. (2017). The digital hood: Social media use among youth in disadvantaged neighborhoods. New Media & Society, 19(6), 950–967. doi:10.1177/1461444815625941
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stokes, P. (2012). Ghosts in the machine: Do the dead live on in Facebook? Philosophy & Technology, 25(3), 363–379. doi:10.1007/s13347-011-0050-7
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Swist, T., Collin, P., McCormack, J., & Third, A. (2015). Social media and the wellbeing of children and young people: A literature review. Perth, WA: Prepared for the Commissioner for Children and Young People, Western Australia.
   Google Scholar
• United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (2017). Labor force statistics from the current population survey. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm
   Google Scholar
• Vallor, S. (2016). Social networking and ethics. In E. N. Zalta Ed., The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2016 ed.). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/ethics-social-networking/
   Google Scholar
• Vickery, J. R. (2015). ‘I don’t have anything to hide, but … ’: The challenges and negotiations of social and mobile media privacy for non-dominant youth. Information, Communication & Society, 18(3), 281–294. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2014.989251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walls, D. M. (2016). User experience in social justice contexts. SIGDOC 16: Proceedings of the 34th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication, Silver Spring, MD.
   Google Scholar
• Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Way, A. K., & Malvini Redden, S. (2017). The study of youth online: A critical review and agenda. Review of Communication, 17(2), 119–136. doi:10.1080/15358593.2017.1293838
   Google Scholar
• Wijetunga, D. (2014). The digital divide objectified in the design: Use of the mobile telephone by underprivileged youth in Sri Lanka. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(3), 712–726. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wohn, D. Y., Ellison, N. B., Khan, M. L., Fewins-Bliss, R., & Gray, R. (2013). The role of social media in shaping first-generation high school students’ college aspirations: A social capital lens. Computers & Education, 63, 424–436. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar