More Like this

1. The Voluntariness of Voluntary Consent: Consent Searches and the Psychology of Compliance

   Sommers, R.; Bohns, V. K. (May 2019, The Yale law journal)

   Consent-based searches are by far the most ubiquitous form of search undertaken by police. A key legal inquiry in these cases is whether consent was granted voluntarily. This Essay suggests that fact finders’ assessments of voluntariness are likely to be impaired by a systematic bias in social perception. Fact finders are likely to underappreciate the degree to which suspects feel pressure to comply with police officers’ requests to perform searches. In two preregistered laboratory studies, we approached a total of 209 participants (“Experiencers”) with a highly intrusive request: to unlock their password-protected smartphones and hand them over to an experimenter to search through while they waited in another room. A separate 194 participants (“Forecasters”) were brought into the lab and asked whether a reasonable person would agree to the same request if hypothetically approached by the same researcher. Both groups then reported how free they felt, or would feel, to refuse the request. Study 1 found that whereas most Forecasters believed a reasonable person would refuse the experimenter’s request, most Experiencers—100 out of 103 people—promptly unlocked their phones and handed them over. Moreover, Experiencers reported feeling significantly less free to refuse than did Forecasters contemplating the same situation hypothetically. Study 2 tested an intervention modeled after a commonly proposed reform of consent searches, in which the experimenter explicitly advises participants that they have the right to withhold consent. We found that this advisory did not significantly reduce compliance rates or make Experiencers feel more free to say no. At the same time, the gap between Experiencers and Forecasters remained significant. These findings suggest that decision makers judging the voluntariness of consent consistently underestimate the pressure to comply with intrusive requests. This is problematic because it indicates that a key justification for suspicionless consent searches—that they are voluntary—relies on an assessment that is subject to bias. The results thus provide support to critics who would like to see consent searches banned or curtailed, as they have been in several states. The results also suggest that a popular reform proposal—requiring police to advise citizens of their right to refuse consent—may have little effect. This corroborates previous observational studies that find negligible effects of Miranda warnings on confession rates among interrogees, and little change in rates of consent once police start notifying motorists of their right to refuse vehicle searches. We suggest that these warnings are ineffective because they fail to address the psychology of compliance. The reason people comply with police, we contend, is social, not informational. The social demands of police-citizen interactions persist even when people are informed of their rights. It is time to abandon the myth that notifying people of their rights makes them feel empowered to exercise those rights. 

   more » « less
2. The Open Brain Consent: Informing research participants and obtaining consent to share brain imaging data

   https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25351  

   Bannier, Elise; Barker, Gareth; Borghesani, Valentina; Broeckx, Nils; Clement, Patricia; Emblem, Kyrre E.; Ghosh, Satrajit; Glerean, Enrico; Gorgolewski, Krzysztof J.; Havu, Marko; et al (February 2021, Human Brain Mapping)

   Abstract Having the means to share research data openly is essential to modern science. For human research, a key aspect in this endeavor is obtaining consent from participants, not just to take part in a study, which is a basic ethical principle, but also to share their data with the scientific community. To ensure that the participants' privacy is respected, national and/or supranational regulations and laws are in place. It is, however, not always clear to researchers what the implications of those are, nor how to comply with them. The Open Brain Consent (https://open-brain-consent.readthedocs.io) is an international initiative that aims to provide researchers in the brain imaging community with information about data sharing options and tools. We present here a short history of this project and its latest developments, and share pointers to consent forms, including a template consent form that is compliant with the EU general data protection regulation. We also share pointers to an associated data user agreement that is not only useful in the EU context, but also for any researchers dealing with personal (clinical) data elsewhere. 

   more » « less
3. Consent as a Foundation for Responsible Autonomy

   https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v36i11.21494  

   Singh, Munindar P. (June 2022, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence)

   This paper focuses on a dynamic aspect of responsible autonomy, namely, to make intelligent agents be responsible at run time. That is, it considers settings where decision making by agents impinges upon the outcomes perceived by other agents. For an agent to act responsibly, it must accommodate the desires and other attitudes of its users and, through other agents, of their users.The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, it provides a conceptual analysis of consent, its benefits and misuses, and how understanding consent can help achieve responsible autonomy. Second, it outlines challenges for AI (in particular, for agents and multiagent systems) that merit investigation to form as a basis for modeling consent in multiagent systems and applying consent to achieve responsible autonomy. 

   more » « less
4. Statistical Privacy and Consent in Data Aggregation

   Scope, Nick; Rasin, Alexander; Lenard, Ben; Wagner, James (July 2024, The 36th International Conference on Scientific and Statistical Database Management (SSDBM))

   As new laws governing management of personal data are introduced, e.g., the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation of 2016 and the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, compliance with data governance legislation is becoming an increasingly important aspect of data management. An important component of many data privacy laws is that they require companies to only use an individual’s data for a purpose the individual has explicitly consented to. Prior methods for enforcing consent for aggregate queries either use access control to eliminate data without consent from query evaluation or apply differential privacy algorithms to inject synthetic noise into the outcomes of queries (or input data) to ensure that the anonymity of non-consenting individuals is preserved with high probability. Both approaches return query results that differ from the ground truth results corresponding to the full input containing data from both consenting and non-consenting individuals. We present an alternative frame- work for group-by aggregate queries, tailored for applications, e.g., medicine, where even a small deviation from the correct answer to a query cannot be tolerated. Our approach uses provenance to determine, for each output tuple of a group-by aggregate query, which individual’s data was used to derive the result for this group. We then use statistical tests to determine how likely it is that the presence of data for a non-consenting individual will be revealed by such an output tuple. We filter out tuples for which this test fails, i.e., which are deemed likely to reveal non-consenting data. Thus, our approach always returns a subset of the ground truth query answers. Our experiments successfully return only 100% accurate results in instances where access control or differential privacy would have either returned less total or less accurate results. 

   more » « less
5. Negotiating peacekeeping consent: Information and peace outcomes

   https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343319861424  

   Yuen, Amy (March 2020, Journal of Peace Research)

   The mixed record on civil war termination shows that it is a difficult task, one fraught with uncertainty and risk. Gaining consent for peacekeeping is one strategy policymakers and scholars forward to reduce these concerns. Formal and informal work argues that allowing peacekeeping serves as a costly signal of peaceful intentions; however, these models treat peacekeeping costs as exogenous. I argue that peacekeeping costs have an endogenous element and use consent for peacekeeping missions as a proxy measure. Three conclusions are evident. It is difficult to determine whether belligerents are insincere actors in a peace process or merely distrustful, but consent can tell us whether a ceasefire is precarious and therefore more likely to fail; peacekeeping is difficult but meaningful under some conditions, and reliable information can be taken from negotiating, not just war-fighting. These results qualify the extent to which peacekeeping, with its changing emphasis on consent, can improve its outcomes. 

   more » « less