Akata, Z., Balliet, D., de Rijke, M., Dignum, F., Dignum, V., Eiben, G., Fokkens, A., Grossi, D., Hindriks, K., Hoos, H., Hung, H., Jonker, C., Monz, C., Neerincx, M., Oliehoek, F., Prakken, H., Schlobach, S., van der Gaag, L., van Harmelen, F., ... Welling, M. (2020). A research agenda for hybrid intelligence: Augmenting human intellect with collaborative, adaptive, responsible, and explainable artificial intelligence. Computer, 53(8), 18-28. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2020.2996587
Asilomar AI Principles. (2018). Principles developed in conjunction with the 2017 Asilomar conference [Benevolent AI 2017].
Beach, M. W., & Fox, T. (2021). Value sensitive speculative design: Exploring more-than-human relations in the age of climate catastrophe. IxD&A, 51, 111-131. https://doi.org/10.55612/s-5002-051-005
Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press.
Cawthorne, D. (2023). The ethics of drone design: How value-sensitive design can create better technologies. Routledge.
Cenci, A., & Cawthorne, D. (2020). Refining value sensitive design: A (capability-based) procedural ethics approach to technological design for well-being. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(5), 2629-2662. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00223-3
Corrêa, N. K., Galvão, C., Santos, J. W., Del Pino, C., Pinto, E. P., Barbosa, C., ... & de Oliveira, N. (2023). Worldwide AI ethics: A review of 200 guidelines and recommendations for AI governance. Patterns, 4(10), Article 100857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100857
Corrêa, N. K. (2024). Dynamic normativity: Necessary and sufficient conditions for value alignment. arXiv preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.11039
de Reuver, M., van Wynsberghe, A., Janssen, M., & Van de Poel, I. (2020). Digital platforms and responsible innovation: Expanding value sensitive design to overcome ontological uncertainty. Ethics and Information Technology, 22(3), 257-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-020-09537-z
European Commission. (2021). Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) (COM 2021 206). https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=COM(2021)206&lang=en
Flanagan, M., Howe, D. C., & Nissenbaum, H. (2005). Values at play: Design tradeoffs in socially-oriented game design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 751-760). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1054972.1055076
Floridi, L. (2023). The ethics of artificial intelligence: Principles, challenges, and opportunities. Oxford University Press.
Friedman, B., & Hendry, D. G. (2019). Value sensitive design: Shaping technology with moral imagination. MIT Press.
Friedman, B., Hendry, D. G., & Borning, A. (2017). A survey of value sensitive design methods. Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction, 11(2), 63-125. https://doi.org/10.1561/1100000015
Gabriel, I. (2020). Artificial intelligence, values, and alignment. Minds and Machines, 30(3), 411-437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09539-2
Gabriel, I., & Ghazavi, V. (2022). The challenge of value alignment. In The Oxford handbook of digital ethics (pp. 336-355). Oxford University Press.
Hagendorff, T. (2020). The ethics of AI ethics: An evaluation of guidelines. Minds and Machines, 30(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09517-8
Hagendorff, T. (2024). Deception abilities emerged in large language models. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(24), e2317967121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2317967121
Hinds, J., Williams, E. J., & Joinson, A. N. (2020). "It wouldn't happen to me": Privacy concerns and perspectives following the Cambridge Analytica scandal. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 143, Article 102498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102498
Howcroft, J., & Vale, J. (2024). What do stakeholders value? Integrating value sensitive design techniques into an impacts-focused design course. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA).
Jacobs, N. (2021). Values and capabilities: Ethics by design for vulnerable people [Doctoral dissertation, Eindhoven University of Technology].
Jacobs, N., & Huldtgren, A. (2021). Why value sensitive design needs ethical commitments. Ethics and Information Technology, 23(1), 23-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9467-3
Kroes, P., & Verbeek, P. P. (Eds.). (2014). The moral status of technical artifacts. Springer.
Kudina, O., & Van de Poel, I. (2024). A sociotechnical system perspective on AI. Minds and Machines, 34(3), Article 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-024-09680-2
Manders-Huits, N. (2011). What values in design? The challenge of incorporating moral values into design. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(2), 271–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-010-9198-2
Miller, B. (2021). Is technology value-neutral? Science, Technology, & Human Values, 46(1), 53-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243919900965
Muller, V. (2021). Ethics of artificial intelligence and robotics. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-ai/
Nyholm, S. (2023). Responsibility gaps, value alignment, and meaningful human control over artificial intelligence. In Risk and responsibility in context(pp. 191-213). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003276029-14
Pareto, J., & Coeckelbergh, M. (2024). Social assistive robotics: An ethical and political inquiry through the lens of freedom. International Journal of Social Robotics, 16(8), 1797-1808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-024-01161-x
Peterson, M., & Spahn, A. (2011). Can technological artefacts be moral agents? Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(3), 411-424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-010-9244-0
Pitt, J. C. (2013). "Guns don't kill, people kill"; values in and/or around technologies. In P. Kroes & P. P. Verbeek (Eds.), The moral status of technical artefacts (pp. 89-101). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7914-3_6
Reijers, W., & Gordijn, B. (2019). Moving from value sensitive design to virtuous practice design. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 17(2), 196-209. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-10-2018-0080
Russell, S. (2019). Human compatible: AI and the problem of control. Allen Lane.
Rydenfelt, H. (2025). Pragmatism as sociotechnical fallibilism and meliorism. AI & SOCIETY, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02499-0
Shen, Y., Tang, L., Le, H., Tan, S., Zhao, Y., Shen, K., ... & Fan, Y. (2025). Aligning and comparing values of ChatGPT and human as learning facilitators: A value-sensitive design approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(4), 1391-1414. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13562
Srivatsa, N., Kaliarnta, S., & Kormelink, J. G. (2017). Responsible innovation: From MOOC to book. TU Delft OPEN Publishing.
Star, S. L., & Bowker, G. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. MIT Press.
Umbrello, S. (2021). The ecological turn in design: Adopting a posthumanist ethics to inform value sensitive design. Philosophies, 6(2), Article 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies6020029
Umbrello, S., & De Bellis, A. F. (2018). A value-sensitive design approach to intelligent agents. In Artificial intelligence safety and security (pp. 395-409). Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Umbrello, S., & Van de Poel, I. (2021). Mapping value sensitive design onto AI for social good principles. AI and Ethics, 1(3), 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00038-3
UNICEF. (2021). Policy guidance on AI for children. United Nations Children's Fund.
Van de Poel, I. (2016). An ethical framework for evaluating experimental technology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(3), 667-686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9724-3
Van de Poel, I. (2023). AI, control and unintended consequences: The need for meta-values. In Rethinking technology and engineering: Dialogues across disciplines and geographies (pp. 117-129). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_9
Van de Poel, I., & Kroes, P. (2014). Can technology embody values? In P. Kroes & P. P. Verbeek (Eds.), The moral status of technical artefacts (pp. 103-124). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7914-3_7
Van den Hoven, J., Vermaas, P., & van de Poel, I. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of ethics and values in technological design: Sources, theory, values and application domains. Springer.
Veluwenkamp, H., & van den Hoven, J. (2023). Design for values and conceptual engineering. Ethics and Information Technology, 25(1), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09675-6
Wallach, W., & Allen, C. (2009). Moral machines: Teaching robots right from wrong. Oxford University Press.
Watson, D. S., Mökander, J., & Floridi, L. (2024). Competing narratives in AI ethics: A defense of sociotechnical pragmatism. AI & SOCIETY, 3163-3185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02128-2
Werthner, H. (2020). The Vienna manifesto on digital humanism. In Digital transformation and ethics (pp. 338-357). Ecowin.
Wiener, N. (1960). Some moral and technical consequences of automation. Science, 131, 1355–1358. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.131.3410.1355
Wolf, M. J., Miller, K., & Grodzinsky, F. S. (2017). Why we should have seen that coming: Comments on Microsoft's Tay "experiment," and wider implications. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 47(3), 54-64. https://doi.org/10.1145/3144592.3144598
Young, M. T., & Coeckelbergh, M. (2024). Keeping things going: Maintenance and philosophy of technology. In M. T. Young & M. Coeckelbergh (Eds.), Maintenance and philosophy of technology: Keeping things going (pp. 1-36). Routledge.
Zuboff, S. (2023). The age of surveillance capitalism. In W. Longhofer & D. Winchester (Eds.), Social theory re-wired: New connections to classical and contemporary perspectives (3rd ed., pp. 203-213). Routledge.
Alpsancar, S. (2023, May). What is AI ethics? Ethics as means of self-regulation and the need for critical reflection. In International Conference on Computer Ethics (Vol. 1, No. 1). http://journals.library.iit.edu/index.php/CEPE2023/article/view/227/233
Andreessen, M. (2023, October 16). The techno-optimist manifesto. Andreessen Horowitz. https://a16z.com/the-techno-optimist-manifesto/
References [In Persian & In Arabic]
Abbasi, M., & Teymouri, M. (2024). A Review of the Ethical and Legal Challenges of Using Artificial Intelligence in the Health System. akhlāq-I Pizishkī i.E., Medical Ethics, 17(48), 1–11. doi: 10.22037/mej.v17i48.44053 [in Persian]
Alasti, K. (2024). Artificial Intelligence and Meaningful Human Control: Agent-Neutral-Reason-Responsive Mechanisms and the Possibility of Tracing Responsible Agent(s). Journal of Philosophical Theological Research, 26(4), 27-54. doi: 10.22091/jptr.2025.11378.3139 [in Persian]
Ashouri Kisomi, M. A. & Parvizi, M. (2024). Investigation of the Ethical Agency of Artificial General Intelligence. Science and Religion Studies, 15(1), 125-151. doi: 10.30465/srs.2024.49282.2162 [in Persian]
Ashouri Kisomi, M. A. (2024). Convergence of privacy and transparency, limitations of artificial intelligence design. Wisdom And Philosophy, 20(78), 45-73. doi: 10.22054/wph.2024.75680.2183 [in Persian]
Ashouri-Kisomi, M. A., Parvizi, M. & Momeni, S. M. H. (2025). Pragmatism, the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence and Sociotechnical Systems. Journal of Philosophical Investigations, 19(52), 281-300. doi: 10.22034/jpiut.2025.66643.4060 [in Persian]
Hoseini Souraki, S. M. (2024). The Meaning and Criteria of Moral Agency in Intelligent Machines. Journal of Philosophical Theological Research, 26(4), 83-108. doi: 10.22091/jptr.2025.12466.3256 [in Persian]
