Six models for the social accountability of computing

This paper briefly examines six public policy strategies for including the "social accountability of computing". "Social accountability" denotes ways of organizing computer specialists, organized groups that develop, manufacture, sell or use computer-based systems, and their markets, so that the broader public is well served. The six models which are examined here include:1. Market arrangements2. Administrative authority3. Professional control4. Regulatory commissions to administer legislative acts5. Judical enforcement and review of legislative acts6. Citizen actionEach is applicable to a different context in which computer-based services are provided. And collectively, they span the set of policy instruments available in liberal democracies. While these models have been extensively developed and examined in a variety of settings, their appropriateness for computing is usually tacitly assumed, rather than grounded in careful analyses. Upon close inspection, each model is found to have severe problems in either its practical effectiveness or its appropriateness for computing.

The social dynamics of instrumental computer use

During the last three decades, computing has far surpassed its early role as a laboratory device for scientific computation. Computers are presently used for a wide array of purposes. In most of its uses it is portrayed as a problem-solving <u>tool</u> and as a material or intellectual object. Despite continuing technical advances, computer use is still costly in its demands for attention and special skills by people (instrumental users) who try to use it to further their own work, whether they program or not. These problems occur because much computer use is inextricably embedded in a complex set of problematic social relationships between groups of service providers and consumers. In particular, serious and continual use of computing forces users to attend to issues associated with:1. The work setting of computer use;2. Understanding the capabilities of computing;3. The scope and rate of technical change;4. Insuring that data is accurate, complete, and timely;5. Control over computing resources;6. The overall time that attention to these social and technical issues require.The opportunities and problems of instrumental computer use vary when users utilize different technologies and different organizational arrangements for supporting them. However, as software and hardware developments progress, the social arrangements of computer use will increasingly dominate the attention of users.

Metal substitutions incarbonic anhydrase: a halide ion probe study

Monitoring of the mental health status of the population and assessment of its determinants are 2 of the most relevant pillars of public mental health, and data from population health surveys could be instrumental to support them. Although these surveys could be an important and suitable resource for these purposes, due to different limitations and challenges, they are often relegated to the background behind other data sources, such as electronic health records. These limitations and challenges include those related to measurement properties and cross-cultural validity of the tools used for the assessment of mental disorders, their degree of representativeness, and possible difficulties in the linkage with other data sources. Successfully addressing these limitations could significantly increase the potential of health surveys in the monitoring of mental disorders and ultimately maximize the impact of the relevant policies to reduce their burden at the population level. The widespread use of data from population health surveys, ideally linked to electronic health records data, would enhance the quality of the information available for research, public mental health decision-making, and ultimately addressing the growing burden of mental disorders.