↓ Skip to main content

Security-by-Experiment: Lessons from Responsible Deployment in Cyberspace

Overview of attention for article published in Science and Engineering Ethics, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Security-by-Experiment: Lessons from Responsible Deployment in Cyberspace
Published in
Science and Engineering Ethics, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11948-015-9648-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wolter Pieters, Dina Hadžiosmanović, Francien Dechesne

Abstract

Conceiving new technologies as social experiments is a means to discuss responsible deployment of technologies that may have unknown and potentially harmful side-effects. Thus far, the uncertain outcomes addressed in the paradigm of new technologies as social experiments have been mostly safety-related, meaning that potential harm is caused by the design plus accidental events in the environment. In some domains, such as cyberspace, adversarial agents (attackers) may be at least as important when it comes to undesirable effects of deployed technologies. In such cases, conditions for responsible experimentation may need to be implemented differently, as attackers behave strategically rather than probabilistically. In this contribution, we outline how adversarial aspects are already taken into account in technology deployment in the field of cyber security, and what the paradigm of new technologies as social experiments can learn from this. In particular, we show the importance of adversarial roles in social experiments with new technologies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 48 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 4 8%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 5 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 19 38%
Social Sciences 11 22%
Engineering 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 6 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 August 2016.
All research outputs
#13,376,502
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#591
of 947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,424
of 268,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#8
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 947 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 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 268,390 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.