Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Survey of Ethical Reasoning Methods, Their Metamodels, and a Discussion on Their Application to Conceptual Modelling

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Conceptual Modeling (ER 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 14320))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 562 Accesses

Abstract

There is wide acknowledgement of the benefits we reap from information and communication technology (ICT) in many facets of our lives. But there is also an increasing concern over the negative ethical, social and environmental impacts it sometimes has. This leads many stakeholders, such as conceptual modellers, programmers, users and policy makers, to situations where they need to reason about the ethical implications raised by ICT engineering or usage. This paper offers a survey of ten ethical reasoning methods suitable for the ICT domain. We present the method metamodels we have authored and then validated through expert interviews. We also reflect about the application of such methods within conceptual modelling. We expect to pave the way for further research on reasoning about the ethical implications of ICT, in general, and conceptual models, in particular.

Sergio España is supported by a María Zambrano grant of the Spanish Ministry of Universities, co-funded by the Next Generation EU European Recovery Plan.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Adamo, G., Willis, M.: Conceptual integration for social-ecological systems. In: Guizzardi, R., Ralyté, J., Franch, X. (eds.) RCIS 2022. LNBIP, pp. 321–337. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05760-1_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Akrich, M.: The de-scription of technical objects (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Barnes, H., Morris, E., Austin, J.: Trans-inclusive genetic counseling services: recommendations from members of the transgender and non-binary community. J. Genet. Couns. 29(3), 423–434 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Basili, V.R., et al.: The empirical investigation of perspective-based reading. Empir. Softw. Eng. 1, 133–164 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Becker, C.: Sustainability Ethics and Sustainability Research. Springer, Cham (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2285-9

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Bell, S., Morse, S.: How people use rich pictures to help them think and act. Systemic Pract. Action Res. 26, 331–348 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Berkhout, F., Hertin, J.: Impacts of information and communication technologies on environmental sustainability: speculations and evidence. Report to the OECD, Brighton 21 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bernasconi, A., García, S.A., Ceri, S., Pastor, O.: A comprehensive approach for the conceptual modeling of genomic data. In: Ralyté, J., Chakravarthy, S., Mohania, M., Jeusfeld, M.A., Karlapalem, K. (eds.) ER 2022. LNCS, vol. 13607, pp. 194–208. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17995-2_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Betz, S., Fritsch, A., Oberweis, A.: TracyML-a modeling language for social impacts of product life cycles. In: ER 2017 Forum/Demos, pp. 179–192 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bock, A.C., España, S., Gulden, J., Jahn, K., Nweke, L.O., Richter, A.: The ethics of information systems: the present state of the discussion and avenues for future work. In: 21st European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2021). Association for Information Systems (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Boenink, M., Swierstra, T., Stemerding, D.: Anticipating the interaction between technology and morality: a scenario study of experimenting with humans in bionanotechnology. Stud. Ethics Law Technol. 4(2) (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bose, U.: An ethical framework in information systems decision making using normative theories of business ethics. Ethics Inf. Technol. 14, 17–26 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Brinkkemper, S.: Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Inf. Softw. Technol. 38(4), 275–280 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cammu, N.: ‘Legal multi-parenthood’ in context: experiences of parents in light of the Dutch proposed family law reforms. Family & Law 07 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Campos, C., Grangel, R.: A domain-specific modelling language for corporate social responsibility (CSR). Comput. Ind. 97, 97–110 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cherfi, S.S.-S., Akoka, J., Comyn-Wattiau, I.: Conceptual modeling quality - from EER to UML schemas evaluation. In: Spaccapietra, S., March, S.T., Kambayashi, Y. (eds.) ER 2002. LNCS, vol. 2503, pp. 414–428. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45816-6_38

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Costa, O.D., Boden, M., Friedewald, M.: Science and technology roadmapping for policy intelligence: lessons for future projects. In: The Second Prague Workshop on Futures Studies Methodology, pp. 146–161 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cöster, M., Olve, N.G., Walldius, Å.: Usability and strategic logic in information systems: supporting insight and action in IT-enabled change. In: Nordisk Workshop 17 i Ekonomi-och Verksamhetsstyrning, Uppsala 2012 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Deneckère, R., Hug, C., Onderstal, J., Brinkkemper, S.: Method association approach: situational construction and evaluation of an implementation method for software products. In: IEEE 9th International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS 2015), pp. 274–285 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/RCIS.2015.7128888

  20. Donaldson, T.: Corporations and Morality. Prentice-Hall (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  21. doteveryone: Consequence Scanning: an agile event for responsible innovators v1. Technical report, TechTransformed (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Eichelberger, H., Schmid, K.: Guidelines on the aesthetic quality of UML class diagrams. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51(12), 1686–1698 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. España, S., Lago, P.: Software Sustainability Assessment (SoSA) exercise report. Technical report, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  24. España, S., van der Maaten, C., Gulden, J., Pastor, Ó.: Ethical reasoning methods for ICT: the technical report. Technical report, OSF Preprints (2023). https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/ebmtp

  25. Evan, W.M., Freeman, R.E.: A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism. In: Beauchamp, T.L., Bowie, N. (eds.) Ethical Theory and Business, 3rd edn., pp. 97–106. Prentice-Hall (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Falk, T., Petri, C.-J., Roy, J., Walldius, Å.: Illustrating an organisation’s strategy as a map. In: Nilsson, F., Petri, C.-J., Westelius, A. (eds.) Strategic Management Control. MP, pp. 9–30. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38640-5_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Feenberg, A.: Questioning Technology. Routledge (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Friedman, B., Hendry, D.G.: Value Sensitive Design: Shaping Technology with Moral Imagination. MIT Press, Cambridge (2019)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Friedman, B., Kahn Jr., P.H., Borning, A.: Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems, chap. 4, pp. 69–101. Wiley (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Friedman, M.: Capitalism and Freedom. University of Chicago press (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Friedman, P.B., Kahn, H., Borning, A.: Value sensitive design and information systems. In: The Ethics of Information Technologies, pp. 289–313. Routledge (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Garousi, V., Felderer, M., Mäntylä, M.V.: The need for multivocal literature reviews in software engineering: complementing systematic literature reviews with grey literature. In: 20th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineerin (EASE 2016). ACM (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Geyer, P.: Systems modelling for sustainable building design. Adv. Eng. Inform. 26(4), 656–668 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Godet, M.: The art of scenarios and strategic planning: tools and pitfalls. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 65(1), 3–22 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Gray, C.M., Kou, Y., Battles, B., Hoggatt, J., Toombs, A.L.: The dark (patterns) side of UX design. In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1–14 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Gulden, J.: Methodical support for model-driven software engineering with enterprise models. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Berlin (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Haraldsson, H.V.: Introduction to system thinking and causal loop diagrams. Department of Chemical Engineering, Lund University Lund, Sweden (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hartmann, N.: Ethik. W. de Gruyter (1926)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Helwig, P.: Charakterologie. Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg, Basel, Wien (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Hilty, L.M., Aebischer, B.: ICT for sustainability: an emerging research field. In: Hilty, L.M., Aebischer, B. (eds.) ICT Innovations for Sustainability. AISC, vol. 310, pp. 3–36. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09228-7_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Hogan, G., et al.: Can a blockchain-based MaaS create business value? Multidisc. Digit. Publ. Inst. Proc. 28(1), 8001 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ihde, D.: Postphenomenology and Technoscience: The Peking University Lectures. SUNY Press (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Jagroep, E.A., et al.: Software energy profiling: comparing releases of a software product. In: 38th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2016), pp. 523–532. Association for Computing Machinery (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Jahn, K., et al.: More than ticking off a checklist? Towards an approach for quantifying the effectiveness of responsible innovation in the design process. In: Second International Workshop on Ethics and Morality in Business Informatics (EMoWI 2020), 15th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, pp. 311–320 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kant, I.: Critique of Pure Reason: Unified Edition (with all Variants from the 1781 and 1787 Editions). Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. (1996). Translated by Werner S. Pluhar

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., et al.: Having trouble with your strategy? Then map it. Harv. Bus. Rev. 78(5), 167–176 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Khaiter, P., Erechtchoukova, M.: Conceptualizing an environmental software modeling framework for sustainable management using UML. J. Environ. Inform. 34(2) (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Klein, B., Schlömer, I.: A robotic shower system: acceptance and ethical issues. Zeitschrift Gerontol. Geriatrie 51, 25–31 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Krogstie, J., Sindre, G., Jørgensen, H.: Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 15, 91–102 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Lago, P.: Architecture design decision maps for software sustainability. In: IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS 2019), pp. 61–64 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEIS.2019.00015

  51. Lago, P., Condori-Fernandez, N.: The sustainability assessment framework (SAF) toolkit: instruments to help sustainability-driven software architecture design decision making (2022). https://github.com/S2-group/SAF-Toolkit

  52. Lago, P., Koçak, S.A., Crnkovic, I., Penzenstadler, B.: Framing sustainability as a property of software quality. Commun. ACM 58(10), 70–78 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Lilley, M., Currie, A., Pyper, A., Attwood, S.: Using the ethical OS toolkit to mitigate the risk of unintended consequences. In: Stephanidis, C., Antona, M., Ntoa, S. (eds.) HCII 2020. CCIS, vol. 1293, pp. 77–82. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60700-5_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  54. Manaf, P.A., Suryadi, S.: Stakeholder marketing deficiency: a practical synthesis on ethical issue during Indonesian banking industry agency era. J. Bus. Strategy Execut. 10(1), 1–15 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Maner, W.: Starter kit in computer ethics. Helvetia Press and the National Information and Resource Center for Teaching Philosophy (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Manzeschke, A., Weber, K., Rother, E., Fangerau, H.: Ethical questions in the area of age appropriate assisting systems. VDI/VDE Innovation + Technik GmbH (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  57. McGinn, C.: Informing the design of HRI systems through use of the Ethics Canvas. In: Proceedings of the Workshop Dangerous HRI: Testing Real-World Robots has Real-World Consequences ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Mendling, J., Reijers, H., van der Aalst, W.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Inf. Softw. Technol. 52(2), 127–136 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Mepham, B.: A framework for the ethical analysis of novel foods: the ethical matrix. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 12(2), 165 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Moor, J.H.: What is computer ethics? Metaphilosophy 16(4), 266–275 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Niggebrugge, T., Vos, S., Lago, P.: The sustainability of mobility as a service solutions evaluated through the software sustainability assessment method. Technical report, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  62. O’Brien, C., O’Mara, M., Issartel, J., McGinn, C.: Exploring the design space of therapeutic robot companions for children. In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI 2021, pp. 243–251. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  63. Öhrwall Rönnbäck, A., Demir, R., Walldius, Å.: A reflection on openness in collaborative product development. In: The 4th ISPIM Innovation Symposium: Managing Innovation for Sustained Productivity: Creating Advantage and Resilience, Wellington (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y.: Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers, vol. 1. Wiley, Hoboken (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Panach, J.I., et al.: Evaluating model-driven development claims with respect to quality: a family of experiments. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 47(1), 130–145 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Petersen, T.S., Ryberg, J.: Applied ethics. In: Oxford Bibliographies. Oxford University Press (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  67. Pinch, T.J., Bijker, W.E.: The social construction of facts and artefacts: or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Soc. Stud. Sci. 14(3), 399–441 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Polyvyanyy, A., van der Werf, J.M.E.M., Overbeek, S., Brouwers, R.: Information systems modeling: language, verification, and tool support. In: Giorgini, P., Weber, B. (eds.) CAiSE 2019. LNCS, vol. 11483, pp. 194–212. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21290-2_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  69. Porcari, A., Pimponi, D., Borsella, E., Mantovani, E.: RRI-CSR roadmap (PRISMA project deliverable 5.2). Technical report, PRISMA (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  70. Rachmann, A.: Das wertequadrat als werkzeug der wirtschaftsinformatik. In: First International Workshop on Ethics and Morality in Business Informatics (EMoWI 2019), 14th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, pp. 42–48 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Rachmann, A., Gulden, J.: Preface: ViVaRE!’23-workshop on virtues and values in requirements engineering. In: Joint Proceedings of REFSQ-2023 Workshops, Doctoral Symposium, Posters & Tools Track and Journal Early Feedback, vol. 3378. CEUR (2023)

    Google Scholar 

  72. Ralyté, J., Rolland, C.: An assembly process model for method engineering. In: Dittrich, K.R., Geppert, A., Norrie, M.C. (eds.) CAiSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2068, pp. 267–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45341-5_18

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  73. Reijers, W., Koidl, K., Lewis, D., Pandit, H.J., Gordijn, B.: Discussing ethical impacts in research and innovation: the ethics canvas. In: Kreps, D., Ess, C., Leenen, L., Kimppa, K. (eds.) HCC13 2018. IAICT, vol. 537, pp. 299–313. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99605-9_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  74. Reijers, W., et al.: Methods for practising ethics in research and innovation: a literature review, critical analysis and recommendations. Sci. Eng. Ethics 24, 1437–1481 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Robinson, S.: Conceptual modelling for simulation part II: a framework for conceptual modelling. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 59(3), 291–304 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  76. Ross, W., Aristotle, Brown, L.: Nicomachean Ethics (Oxford World’s Classics). Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  77. Ruiz, M., España, S., Pastor, Ó., Gonz, A., et al.: Supporting organisational evolution by means of model-driven reengineering frameworks. In: IEEE 7th International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS), pp. 1–10. IEEE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  78. Schot, J., Rip, A.: The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 54(2–3), 251–268 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Schwartz, S.H., et al.: An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Read. Psychol. Cult. 2(1), 2307–0919 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  80. van der Stappen, E., van Steenbergen, M.: The ethical matrix in digital innovation projects in higher education. In: BLED 2020 Proceedings, p. 20 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  81. Steele, C.M., Liu, T.J.: Dissonance processes as self-affirmation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 45(1), 5 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. van Steenbergen, M., van der Spoel, I.: Online proctoring: Adding human values to the equation. In: BLED 2021 Proceedings, p. 44 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  83. Strenge, B., Schack, T.: AWOSE-a process model for incorporating ethical analyses in agile systems engineering. Sci. Eng. Ethics 26, 851–870 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Swierstra, T., Rip, A.: Nano-ethics as nest-ethics: patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology. NanoEthics 1, 3–20 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Swierstra, T., Rip, A. Nano-ethics as NEST-ethics: patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology. Nanoethics 1, 3–20 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-007-0005-8

  86. von Thun, F.S.: Miteinander reden 2: Stile, Werte und Persönlichkeitsentwicklung: Differentielle Psychologie der Kommunikation, vol. 2. Rowohlt Verlag GmbH (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  87. Torelli, R.: Sustainability, responsibility and ethics: Different concepts for a single path. Soc. Responsib. J. 17(5), 719–739 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Wesleyan University: Ethics in society. https://www.wesleyan.edu/ethics/reason.html. Accessed 05 May 2023

  89. Vallor, S.: Technology and the Virtues: A Philosophical Guide to a Future Worth Wanting. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2016)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  90. Van Harreveld, F., Van der Pligt, J., De Liver, Y.N.: The agony of ambivalence and ways to resolve it: introducing the maid model. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 13(1), 45–61 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Verbeek, P.P.: What Things Do: Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design. Penn State Press (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  92. Walldius, Å.: Strategy mapping: a method for making value tensions explicit in design and deployment of IT systems. Ethics Inf. Technol. 23, 45–48 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Walldius, C.Å., Lantz, A.: Exploring the use of design pattern maps for aligning new technical support to new clinical team meeting routines. Behav. Inf. Technol. 32(1), 68–79 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. van de Weerd, I., Brinkkemper, S.: Meta-modeling for situational analysis and design methods. In: Handbook of Research on Modern Systems Analysis and Design Technologies and Applications, pp. 35–54. IGI Global (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  95. Wiener, N.: The Human Use of Human Beings. Houghton-Mifflin (1950)

    Google Scholar 

  96. Wieringa, R.J.: Design Science Methodology for Information Systems and Software Engineering. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43839-8

    Book  Google Scholar 

  97. Wohlin, C.: Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. In: 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, pp. 1–10 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  98. Wright, D., et al.: Ethical dilemma scenarios and emerging technologies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 87, 325–336 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Wutzkowsky, J., Böckmann, B.: Using MEESTAR to identify ethical and social issues implementing a digital patient-centered care platform. In: 12th eHealth, pp. 278–285 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  100. Zucker, J., d’Leeuwen, M.: Arbiter: a domain-specific language for ethical machine learning. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp. 421–425. Association for Computing Machinery (2020)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to the interviewees, for their time and for sharing their method knowledge with us. Also to the students of Responsible ICT (Master in Business Informatics, Utrecht University), for their insightful comments on some of the methods.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Valencian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence, Universitat Politècnica de València, València, Spain

    Sergio España & Óscar Pastor

  2. Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Sergio España, Chris van der Maaten & Jens Gulden

Authors
  1. Sergio España
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chris van der Maaten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jens Gulden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Óscar Pastor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sergio España .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Federal University of Espírito Santo, Vitória, Brazil

    João Paulo A. Almeida

  2. Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    José Borbinha

  3. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Giancarlo Guizzardi

  4. University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Sebastian Link

  5. Stockholm University, Kista, Sweden

    Jelena Zdravkovic

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

España, S., van der Maaten, C., Gulden, J., Pastor, Ó. (2023). A Survey of Ethical Reasoning Methods, Their Metamodels, and a Discussion on Their Application to Conceptual Modelling. In: Almeida, J.P.A., Borbinha, J., Guizzardi, G., Link, S., Zdravkovic, J. (eds) Conceptual Modeling. ER 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14320. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47262-6_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47262-6_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-47261-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-47262-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation