Cave Jonathan
Department of Economics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2016 Dec 28;374(2083). doi: 10.1098/rsta.2016.0117.
Data collection and modelling are increasingly important in social science and science-based policy, but threaten to crowd out other ways of thinking. Economists recognize that markets embody and shed light on human sentiments. However, their ethical consequences have been difficult to interpret, let alone manage. Although economic mechanisms are changed by data intensity, they can be redesigned to restore their benefits. We conclude with four cautions: if data are good, more may not be better; scientifically desirable data properties may not help policy; consent is a double-edged tool; and data exist only because someone thought to capture and codify them.This article is part of the themed issue 'The ethical impact of data science'.
数据收集与建模在社会科学及基于科学的政策制定中愈发重要，但可能会排挤其他思维方式。经济学家认识到市场体现并揭示人类情感。然而，其伦理后果却难以解读，更不用说管理了。尽管经济机制会因数据强度而改变，但可以重新设计以恢复其益处。我们给出四点警示作为结论：如果数据是好的，更多未必更好；科学上理想的数据属性可能无助于政策制定；同意是一把双刃剑；数据的存在仅仅是因为有人想到要去捕捉并编纂它们。本文是主题为“数据科学的伦理影响”的特刊的一部分。
