Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41689624›Full record

SynthesisScience and engineering ethics2026

Toward a Clearer Process for Value Sensitive Artificial Intelligence.

Christina Cociancig, Hendrik Heuer

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Science and engineering ethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Christina CociancigUniversity of Bremen, Am Fallturm 1, 28359, Bremen, Germany. chrcoc@uni-bremen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5645-6432
Hendrik HeuerCenter for Advanced Internet Studies, Konrad-Zuse-Straße 2a, 44801, Bochum, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1919-9016

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Design approaches such as Value Sensitive Design (VSD) facilitate the alignment of technology design with societal and ethical values. VSD serves as a proactive and iterative framework for integrating ethical considerations into design, encompassing three interrelated types of investigations: conceptual investigations, which analyze relevant values and stakeholders; empirical investigations, which gather data about stakeholders’ experiences and value prioritization; and technical investigations, which focus on embedding these values into the functionality of technologies. This paper critically examines the application of VSD for artificial intelligence (AI) through a systematic literature review. By addressing VSD’s theoretical pillars and AI’s ambiguous boundaries, the study maps these complexities to the descriptions of the practical implementation in value sensitive AI (VSAI) literature. Our findings contribute to a comprehensive framework identifying practical and theoretical gaps, such as the operationalization of VSD’s tripartite methodology in AI contexts and value prioritization. We contribute a synthesis of recommendations from the literature as well as our own to fill these gaps and offer actionable strategies for future VSAI applications. Together, these insights clarify the current methodological landscape, and provide researchers with practical guidance in building value sensitive AI.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceSocial ValuesTechnologyHumansAI ethicsValue sensitive artificial intelligenceValue sensitive designVSAI

Identifiers

PMID41689624
PMCPMC12932356

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.