A simple grid that makes you check, for every group affected by a technology, how it touches their wellbeing, autonomy and fairness, so you can weigh the concerns openly.
| Website | https:// |
| Developed by | Ben Mepham (Centre for Applied Bioethics, University of Nottingham), Food Ethics Council (1996) |
| Type | Framework: Grid for structured group deliberation, with free guide and manual |
| Lifecycle phase | Design |
| FUTURE-AI | Fairness, General recommendations |
| For | Researchers, Policy makers and managers, Healthcare professionals, Patients and communities |
| Facilitation | Facilitator recommended |
| Skills needed | none |
| Cost | Free |
| Languages | English |
| Maturity | Established |
| Licence | No licence stated; free-to-download guide, all rights reserved |
What it is¶
The rows of the matrix list the parties affected by a decision and the columns list three principles: wellbeing, autonomy and fairness. You fill each cell with the specific concern for that party, then discuss and weigh the cells as a group. The method borrows from principle-based medical ethics and was first applied to food and agricultural technologies, but it works for any new technology. It does not give you an answer; it makes the range of concerns and the way you weigh them explicit.
In healthcare¶
Kelly et al. (2023) used an ethical matrix workshop, co-designed with a patient expert, to involve people with multiple sclerosis, radiologists, neurologists and computer scientists in research on AI in radiology.
Where to use it in The ELSA Way¶
Ethical review and approval › Application-specific ethical issues: Filling in the matrix for patients, clinicians and other parties gives you a structured way to find and document the application-specific issues listed in this section.
Social and societal impact › Health equity: The fairness column asks, for each group, whether the AI would leave them better or worse off, which shows early where inequities could arise.
References¶
Mepham B. A framework for the ethical analysis of novel foods: the ethical matrix. J Agric Environ Ethics. 2000;12:165-176. Mepham (2000)
Mepham B, Kaiser M, Thorstensen E, Tomkins S, Millar K. Ethical Matrix Manual. The Hague: LEI; 2006. https://
edepot .wur .nl /216589 Kelly BS, Kirwan A, Quinn MS, et al. The ethical matrix as a method for involving people living with disease and the wider public (PPI) in near-term artificial intelligence research. Radiography. 2023;29:S103-S111. Kelly et al. (2023)
Related tools¶
Value Sensitive Design: A design approach, with ready-made methods and card decks, for identifying the people and human values a technology affects and building those values into the design from the start.
Aanpak Begeleidingsethiek: A facilitated workshop method in which the people affected by a new technology map its effects and values together and agree on concrete actions for the technology, its setting and its users.
Moral Medtech: A cooperative serious game in which patients, clinicians, developers and regulators agree which values a medical AI tool must protect and turn them into design requirements.
Also listed in: RAAIT toolbox.
- Mepham, B. (2000). A Framework for the Ethical Analysis of Novel Foods: The Ethical Matrix. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12(2), 165–176. 10.1023/a:1009542714497
- Kelly, B. S., Kirwan, A., Quinn, M. S., Kelly, A. M., Mathur, P., Lawlor, A., & Killeen, R. P. (2023). The ethical matrix as a method for involving people living with disease and the wider public (PPI) in near-term artificial intelligence research. Radiography, 29, S103–S111. 10.1016/j.radi.2023.03.009