The Quantified Relationship

by | Feb 2, 2018 | Research Publications

Author(s):

  • Danaher, John
  • Nyholm, Sven
  • Earp, Brian D.

Abstract:

The growth of self-tracking and personal surveillance has given rise to the Quantified Self movement. Members of this movement seek to enhance their personal well-being, productivity, and self-actualization through the tracking and gamification of personal data. The technologies that make this possible can also track and gamify aspects of our interpersonal, romantic relationships. Several authors have begun to challenge the ethical and normative implications of this development. In this article, we build upon this work to provide a detailed ethical analysis of the Quantified Relationship (QR). We identify eight core objections to the QR and subject them to critical scrutiny. We argue that although critics raise legitimate concerns, there are ways in which tracking technologies can be used to support and facilitate good relationships. We thus adopt a stance of cautious openness toward this technology and advocate the development of a research agenda for the positive use of QR technologies.

Document:

https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2017.1409823

References:
  1. Abrams, K. 1998. From autonomy to agency: Feminist perspectives on self-direction. William and Mary Law Review 40:805–46 [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson, E. 2012. The monogamy gap: Men, love, and the reality of cheating. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bostrom, N. and T. Ord. 2006. The reversal test: Overcoming status quo bias in applied ethics. Ethics 116 (4):656–79 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brennan, J., and W. Jaworski. 2015. Markets without symbolic limits. Ethics 125 (4):1053–77. doi:10.1086/680907. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  5. Clark, M. S., and J. Mils. 1993. The difference between communal and exchange relationships: What it is and is not. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 19 (6):684–91. [Google Scholar]
  6. Clark, M. S., and B. Waddell. 1985. Perceptions of exploitation in communal and exchange relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 2 (4):403–18. [Google Scholar]
  7. Coontz, S. 2006. Marriage, a history: How love conquered marriage. New York, NY: Penguin. [Google Scholar]
  8. Danaher, J., B. D. Earp, and A. Sandberg. 2017. Should we campaign against sex robots?. In Robot sex: Social and ethical implications, ed. J. Danaher and N. McArthur, 47–71. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Google Scholar]
  9. Drabek, M. 2016. Pornographic subordination, power, and feminist alternatives. Feminist Philosophy Quarterly 2 (1):article 2. http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/fpq/vol2/iss1/2. doi:10.5206/fpq/2016.1.2. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  10. Duhigg, C. 2012. The power of habit. London, UK: Random House. [Google Scholar]
  11. Earp, B. D. 2016. In praise of ambivalence: “Young” feminism, gender identity, and free speech. Quillette Magazine, July 1. Available at: http://quillette.com/2016/07/02/in-praise-of-ambivalence-young-feminism-gender-identity-and-free-speech. [Google Scholar]
  12. Earp, B. D., A. Sandberg, and J. Savulescu. 2012. Natural selection, childrearing, and the ethics of marriage (and divorce): Building a case for the neuroenhancement of human relationships. Philosophy & Technology 25 (4):561–87. doi:10.1007/s13347-012-0081-8. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Google Scholar]
  13. Earp, B. D., A. Sandberg, G. Kahane, and J. Savulescu. 2014. When is diminishment a form of enhancement? Rethinking the enhancement debate in biomedical ethics. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 8:12. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00012. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Google Scholar]
  14. Earp, B. D., A. Sandberg, and J. Savulescu. 2014. Brave new love: The threat of high-tech “conversion” therapy and the bio-oppression of sexual minorities. AJOB Neuroscience 5 (1):4–12. doi:10.1080/21507740.2013.863242. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]
  15. Earp, B. D., A. Sandberg, and J. Savulescu. 2015. The medicalization of love. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (3):323–36. doi:10.1017/S0963180114000206. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  16. Earp, B. D., A. Sandberg, and J. Savulescu. 2016. The medicalization of love: Response to critics. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 25 (4):759–71. doi:10.1017/S0963180116000542. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  17. Earp, B. D., and J. Savulescu. 2017. Love drugs: Why scientists should study the effects of pharmaceuticals on human romantic relationships. Technology in Society (Epub ahead of print). doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2017.02.001. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  18. Earp, B. D., O. A. Wudarczyk, A. Sandberg, and J. Savulescu. 2013. If I could just stop loving you: Anti-love biotechnology and the ethics of a chemical breakup. American Journal of Bioethics 13 (11):3–17. doi:10.1080/15265161.2013.839752. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  19. Fedele, D. A., C. C. Cushing, A. Fritz, C. M. Amara, and A. Ortega. 2017. Mobile health interventions for improving health outcomes in youth: A meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatrics (Epub ahead of print). doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.0042. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  20. Ganesan, A. N., J. Louise, M. Horsfall, S. A. Bilsborough, J. Hendriks, A. D. McGavigan, J. B. Selvanayagam, and D. P. Chew. 2016. International mobile-health intervention on physical activity, Sitting and Weight: The Stepathalon Cardiovascular health study. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 67 (21):2453–63. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2016.03.472. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  21. Gomez Quinonez, S., M. J. L. Walthouwer, D. N. Schulz, and H. de Vries. 2016. mHealth or eHealth? Efficacy, Use and appreciation of a Web-based computer-tailored physical activity intervention for Dutch adults: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research 18 (11):e278. doi:10.2196/jmir.6171. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  22. Gordon, B. 2014. Why are women still doing most of the housework? The Telegraph, February 9. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10621402/Why-are-women-still-doing-most-of-the-housework.html. [Google Scholar]
  23. Greengard, S. 2015. The Internet of things. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  24. Griffy-Brown, C., B. D. Earp, and O. Rosas. 2018. Technology and the good society. Technology in Society, in press. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/35504250/Technology_and_the_good_society [Google Scholar]
  25. Gupta, K. 2012. Protecting sexual diversity: Rethinking the use of neurotechnological interventions to alter sexuality. AJOB Neuroscience 3 (3):24–8. [Google Scholar]
  26. Gupta, K. 2013. Anti-love biotechnologies: Integrating considerations of the social. American Journal of Bioethics 13 (11):18–19. doi:10.1080/15265161.2013.839771. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  27. Hare, S., and N. Vincent 2016. Happiness, cerebroscopes and incorrigibility: Prospects for neuroeudaimonia. Neuroethics 9:69–84. doi:10.1007/s12152-016-9254-y. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  28. Jenkins, C. 2017. What love is. New York, NY: Basic Books [Google Scholar]
  29. Kelly, K. 2016. The inevitable: Understanding the 12 technological forces that will shape your future. New York, NY: Viking [Google Scholar]
  30. Kleinplatz, P. 2017. An existential-experiential approach to sex therapy. In The Wiley-Blackwell handbook to sex therapy, ed. Z. Peterson, 218–30. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  31. Kolodny, N. 2003. Love as valuing a relationship. Philosophical Review 112:135–89. doi:10.1215/00318108-112-2-135. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  32. Levy, K. 2014. Intimate surveillance. Idaho Law Review 51:679–93. [Google Scholar]
  33. Lanzing, M. 2016. The transparent self. Ethics and Information Technology 18:9–16. doi:10.1007/s10676-016-9396-y. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  34. Lupton, D. 2015. Quantified sex: A critical analysis of sexual and reproductive self-tracking using apps. Culture, Health and Sexuality 17 (4):440–53. doi:10.1080/13691058.2014.920528. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  35. Lupton, D. 2016. The quantified self. London, UK: Polity Press [Google Scholar]
  36. Madva, A. 2016. A Plea for anti-anti individualism: How oversimple psychology misleads social policy. Ergo 3 (27):701–28 [Google Scholar]
  37. Maturo, A. 2015. Doing things with numbers: The quantified self and the gamification of health. EA Journal 7 (1). Available at: www.ea-journal.com [Google Scholar]
  38. Maturo, A., L. Mori, and V. Moretti. 2016. An ambiguous health education: The quantified self and the medicalization of the mental sphere. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education 8 (3):248–68. [Google Scholar]
  39. McGonigal, J. 2011. Reality is broken. New York, NY: Random House [Google Scholar]
  40. Meixel, A., E. Yanchar, and A. Fugh-Berman. 2015. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder: inventing a disease to sell low libido. Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (10):859–62. doi:10.1136/medethics-2014-102596. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  41. Michie, S. M. M van Stralen, and R. West. 2011. The behavior change wheel: A new method for characterizing and designing behavior change interventions. Implementation Science 6:42. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-42. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  42. Michie, S., M. Richardson, M. Johnston et al. 2013. The behavior change technique Taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: Building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 46 (1):81–95. doi:10.1007/s12160-013-9486-6. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  43. Moore, P., and A. Robinson. 2015. The quantified self: What counts in the neo-liberal workplace. New Media and Society 18 (11). doi:10.1177/1461444815604328. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  44. Moore, P. 2017. The quantified self in precarity. London, UK: Routledge, forthcoming. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  45. Morrissey, E. C., T. K. Corbett, J. L. Walsh, and G. J. Molloy. 2016. Behavior change techniques in apps for medication adherence: A content analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 50 (5):e143–6. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.09.034. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Google Scholar]
  46. Mumford, L. 2010. Technics and civilization. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  47. Munson, M. and J. Stelboum. 2013. The lesbian polyamory reader: Open relationships, non-monogamy, and casual sex. New York, NY: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  48. Naar, H. 2016. Real-world love drugs: Reply to Nyholm. Journal of Applied Philosophy 33:197–201. doi:10.1111/japp.12141. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  49. Neal, D. T., W. Wood, J. S. Labrecque, and P. Lally. 2012. How do habits guide behavior? Perceived and actual triggers of habits in daily life. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48:492–98. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.011. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  50. Neff, G., and D. Nafus. 2016. Self-tracking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  51. Nyholm, S. 2015a. Love troubles: Human attachment and biomedical enhancements. Journal of Applied Philosophy 31 (2):190–202. doi:10.1111/japp.12085. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  52. Nyholm, S. 2015b. The medicalization of love and narrow and broad conceptions of human well-being. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (3):337–46. doi:10.1017/S0963180114000644. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  53. Nyholm, S., and L. Frank. 2017. From sex robots to love robots: Is mutual love with a robot possible? In Robot sex: Social and ethical implications, ed. J. Danaher and N. McArthur, 219–44. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Google Scholar]
  54. Pettit, P. 2015. The robust demands of the good: Ethics with attachment, virtue, and respect. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  55. Popken, B. 2014. The couple that pays each other to put the kids to bed. NBC News January 8. Available at: http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/couple-pays-each-other-put-kids-bed-n13021 (accessed November 15, 2016). [Google Scholar]
  56. Semrau, L. 2015. The best argument against kidney sales fails. Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (6):443. doi:10.1136/medethics-2014-102390. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  57. Shweder, R. A. 2012. Relativism and universalism. In A companion to moral anthropology, ed. Didier Fassin, 85–102. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
  58. Solove, D. 2004. The digital person: Technology and privacy in the information age. New York, NY: NYU Press. [Google Scholar]
  59. Soule, B. 2013. For love and/or money: Financial autonomy in marriage. Messy Matters Blog. Available at: http://messymatters.com/autonomy (accessed November 15, 2016). [Google Scholar]
  60. Thakkar, J., R. Kurup, L. Tracey-Lea, et al. 2016. Mobile telephone text messaging for medication adherence in chronic disease: A meta-analysis. JAMA Internal Medicine 176 (3):340–49. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.7667. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  61. Walsh, J., T. Corbett, M. Hogan, J. Duggan, and A. McNamara. 2016. An mHealth intervention using a smartphone app to increase walking behavior in young adults: A pilot study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 4 (3):e109. doi:10.2196/mhealth.5227. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  62. Wood, W., and D. Neal. 2007. A new look at habits and the habit–goal interface. Psychological Review 114 (4):843–63. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.843. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  63. Wolf, G. 2009. Know thyself: Tracking every facet of life, from sleep to mood to pain 24/7/365. Wired. http://www.wired.com/2009/06/lbnp-knowthyself (accessed August 22, 2016). [Google Scholar]
  64. Wolf, G. 2010. The data-driven life. New York Times Magazine, May 2. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/magazine/02self-measurement-t.html?_r=0 (accessed August 22, 2016). [Google Scholar]
  65. Wootton, B. 1959. Social science and social pathology. New York, NY: Macmillan. [Google Scholar]
  66. Wudarczyk, O. A., B. D. Earp, A. Guastella, and J. Savulescu. 2013. Could intranasal oxytocin be used to enhance relationships? Research imperatives, clinical policy, and ethical considerations. Current Opinion in Psychiatry 26 (5):474. doi:10.1097/YCO.0b013e3283642e10. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
  67. Youmans, W. L. and J. C. York. 2012. Social media and the activist toolkit: User agreements, corporate interests, and the information infrastructure of modern social movements. Journal of Communication 62 (2):315–29. [Google Scholar]