Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jun;21(6):37-50.
doi: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1863508. Epub 2021 Jan 27.

Design Bioethics: A Theoretical Framework and Argument for Innovation in Bioethics Research

Gabriela Pavarini  1 , Robyn McMillan  1   2 , Abigail Robinson  1 , Ilina Singh  1
Affiliations

Design Bioethics: A Theoretical Framework and Argument for Innovation in Bioethics Research

Gabriela Pavarini et al. Am J Bioeth. 2021 Jun.

Abstract

Empirical research in bioethics has developed rapidly over the past decade, but has largely eschewed the use of technology-driven methodologies. We propose "design bioethics" as an area of conjoined theoretical and methodological innovation in the field, working across bioethics, health sciences and human-centred technological design. We demonstrate the potential of digital tools, particularly purpose-built digital games, to align with theoretical frameworks in bioethics for empirical research, integrating context, narrative and embodiment in moral decision-making. Purpose-built digital tools can engender situated engagement with bioethical questions; can achieve such engagement at scale; and can access groups traditionally under-represented in bioethics research and theory. If developed and used with appropriate rigor, tools motivated by "design bioethics" could offer unique insights into new and familiar normative and empirical issues in the field.

Keywords: Design bioethics; empirical bioethics; epistemology; games; videogames; young people.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Using digital tools to investigate adolescents’ perspectives on the ethics of digital phenotyping for mental health.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Adams, E. 2010. Fundamentals of game design. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
    1. Ahn, S. J. G., Bostick J., Ogle E., Nowak K. L., McGillicuddy K. T., and Bailenson J. N.. 2016. Experiencing nature: Embodying animals in immersive virtual environments increases inclusion of nature in self and involvement with nature. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 21 (6):399–419. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12173. - DOI
    1. Ahn, S. J. G., Le A. M. T., and Bailenson J.. 2013. The effect of embodied experiences on self-other merging, attitude, and helping behavior. Media Psychology 16 (1):7–38. doi:10.1080/15213269.2012.755877. - DOI
    1. Anderson, C. A., Shibuya A., Ihori N., Swing E. L., Bushman B. J., Sakamoto A., Rothstein H. R., and Saleem M.. 2010. Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in Eastern and Western countries: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin 136 (2):151–73. doi:10.1037/a0018251. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arras, J. D. 1991. Getting down to cases: The revival of casuistry in bioethics. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (1):29–51. doi:10.1093/jmp/16.1.29. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources