| Title |
Support for the Development of Technological Innovations: Promoting Responsible Social Uses
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science and Engineering Ethics, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11948-017-9911-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Georges A. Legault, Céline Verchère, Johane Patenaude |
| Abstract |
How can technological development, economic development, and the claims from society be reconciled? How should responsible innovation be promoted? The "responsible social uses" approach proposed here was devised with these considerations in view. In this article, a support procedure for promoting responsible social uses (RSU) is set out and presented. First, the context in which this procedure emerged, which incorporates features of both the user-experience approach and that of ethical acceptability in technological development, is specified. Next, the characteristic features of the procedure are presented, that is, its purpose, fundamental orientation, and component parts as experimented by partners. Third, the RSU approach is compared with other support approaches and considered in term of how each approach assumes responsible innovation. Briefly, the RSU procedure is a way of addressing the issue of responsible innovation through an effective integration of social concerns. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 47 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 14% |
| Professor | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 20% |
| Unknown | 17 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 12 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 18 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2018.
All research outputs
#20,090,001
of 24,696,958 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#841
of 950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,536
of 315,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#22
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,696,958 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 950 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,006 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.