@article{RacineBryson, author = {Racine, Elise and Bryson, Joanna}, title = {Epidemic modeling as a means to reimagine health education and policy post-COVID}, series = {Health Education}, volume = {ahead of print}, journal = {Health Education}, issn = {0965-4283}, doi = {10.1108/HE-02-2021-0028}, abstract = {Purpose As illustrated by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), epidemic models are powerful health policy tools critical for disease prevention and control, i.e. if they are fit for purpose. How do people ensure this is the case and where does health education fit in? Design/methodology/approach This research takes a multidisciplinary approach combining qualitative secondary and primary data from a literature review, interviews and surveys. The former spans academic literature, grey literature and course curriculum, while the latter two involve discussions with various modeling stakeholders (educators, academics, students, modeling experts and policymakers) both within and outside the field of epidemiology. Findings More established approaches (compartmental models) appear to be favored over emerging techniques, like agent-based models. This study delves into how formal and informal education opportunities may be driving this preference. Drawing from other fields, the authors consider how this can be addressed. Practical implications This study offers concrete recommendations (course design routed in active learning pedagogies) as to how health education and, by extension, policy can be reimagined post-COVID to make better use of the full range of epidemic modeling methods available. Originality/value There is a lack of research exploring how these methods are taught and how this instruction influences which methods are employed. To fill this gap, this research uniquely engages with modeling stakeholders and bridges disciplinary silos to build complimentary knowledge.}, language = {en} } @incollection{McBrideKupiBryson, author = {McBride, Keegan and Kupi, Maximilian and Bryson, Joanna}, title = {Untangling Agile Government: On the Dual Necessities of Structure and Agility}, series = {Agile Government: Emerging Perspectives in Public Management}, booktitle = {Agile Government: Emerging Perspectives in Public Management}, editor = {Stephens, Melodena and Awamleh, Raed and Salem, Fadi}, publisher = {World Scientific Publishing}, address = {Singapur}, isbn = {9789811239694}, doi = {10.1142/9789811239700_0002}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {300}, abstract = {The governments of today are not able to transform and adapt to changes in the world around them, as demanded by their constituents. The nature of work, value of public goods, and the constant bombardment of crises are making the old bureaucratic structures obsolete. Agile Government is an emerging theme, that of government-wide reinvention for adaptiveness and responsiveness. It places the accountability, delivery, capture, design and creation of public value at the heart of the government. The concept of agile government is confused with terms like Agile Manifesto, agile governance, agility among others, and because of this, needs some unpacking. This book is a deep dive into this topic. It offers insights from the theoretical development of the topic of agile government, some lessons from government practices around the world, and ongoing academic and policy research. The project is spearheaded by the Mohammed Bin Rashid School of Government, which is the first teaching and research institution in the Arab world focusing on public policy and governance.}, language = {en} } @unpublished{DempseyMcBrideHaatajaetal., author = {Dempsey, Mark and McBride, Keegan and Haataja, Meeri and Bryson, Joanna}, title = {Transnational digital governance and its impact on artificial intelligence}, doi = {10.31235/osf.io/xu3jr}, pages = {20}, abstract = {The rapid pace of technological advancement and innovation has put governance and regulatory mechanisms to the test. There is a clear need for new and innovative regulatory mechanisms that enable governments to successfully manage the integration of such technologies into our societies and ensure that such integration occurs in a sustainable, beneficial, and just manner. Artificial Intelligence stands out as one of the most debated such innovations. What exactly is it, how should it be built, how can it be used, and how and should it be regulated? Yet, in this debate, AI is becoming widely utilized within both existing, evolving, and bespoke regulatory contexts. The present chapter explores in particular what is arguably the most successful AI regulatory approach to date, that of the European Union. We explore core definitional concepts, shared understandings, values, and approaches currently in play. We argue that due to the so-called 'Brussels effect', regulatory initiatives within the European Union have a much broader global impact and, therefore, warrant close inspection.}, language = {en} } @article{Bryson, author = {Bryson, Joanna}, title = {One Day, AI Will Seem as Human as Anyone. What Then?}, series = {Wired}, journal = {Wired}, language = {en} } @article{BrysonHaataja, author = {Bryson, Joanna and Haataja, Meeri}, title = {The European Parliament's AI Regulation: Should We Call It Progress?}, series = {Amicus Curiae}, volume = {4, Series 2}, journal = {Amicus Curiae}, number = {3}, doi = {10.14296/ac.v4i3.5612}, pages = {707 -- 718}, abstract = {The European Union (EU) has been leading the world with its influential digital regulation. However, the EU's legislative process is sufficiently complex and careful that some national legislation clearly influenced by the EU's AI Regulation is already in place in other countries, before the law has even been finalized in the EU. Meanwhile, other states and regions are just beginning to develop AI policy. For both the EU and such others, we here describe the outcomes of the first round of legislative action by one of the EU's two legislative bodies, the European Parliament, in terms of modifying the Artificial Intelligence Act. The Parliament has introduced a number of changes we consider to be enormously important, some in a very good way, and some in a very bad way. At stake is whether the AI Act really brings the power and strength of product law to continuously scale improved practice on products in the EU with intelligent components, or whether the law becomes window-dressing aimed only at attacking a few elite actors post hoc. We describe here the EU process, the changes and our recommendations.}, language = {en} } @techreport{DariusStockmannBrysonetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Darius, Philipp and Stockmann, Daniela and Bryson, Joanna and Cingolani, Luciana and Griffin, Rachel and Hammerschmid, Gerhard and Kupi, Maximilian and Mones, Haytham and Munzert, Simon and Riordan, R{\´o}n{\´a}n and Stockreiter, Simona}, title = {Implementing Data Access of the Digital Services Act: Collaboration of European Digital Service Coordinators and Researchers in Building Strong Oversight over Social Media Platforms}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-4947}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-49479}, pages = {11}, abstract = {The EU Digital Service Acts signals a move away from self-regulation towards co-regulation of social media platforms within the European Union. To address online harms and rising platform power the DSA clarifies responsibilities of platforms and outlines a new technology regulatory framework to increase oversight. One key oversight instrument constitutes Article 40 of the DSA, which lays out data access for vetted researchers, who add value to regulators and the broader public as creators of knowledge, educators, advisors, innovators, and watchdogs. Currently, the EU Commission and national governments make important decisions regarding Digital Service Coordinators (DSCs) that play a key role in implementation. Based on expertise on European public administration and political science we lay out key challenges and success factors of DSCs that will play a role in promoting successful cooperation between DSCs and researchers. We provide three recommendations: First, we recommend to strengthen transfer of scientific knowledge into policy-making by processing publicly accessible publications within public administrative bodies. To this end, capacities of DSCs need to be increased. In addition, we also point towards the database of vetted researchers collected by the Board of DSCs as important resource in order to strengthen knowledge transfer. Second, the DSC network requires agile institutions with fast response time in order to enable researchers to play a constructive role in implementation. This also includes institutional procedures between DSCs and the Intermediary Body and Data Protection Agencies. To avoid delay in implementation agile institution-building needs to start now. Finally, institutional safeguards will help to avoid strategic choice of companies of the DSC of establishment. At the same time, the Irish DSC's capacity should be strengthened compared to other national DSCs since most large intermediary services providers have their European headquarters in Ireland.}, language = {en} } @article{BaumBrysonDignumetal., author = {Baum, Kevin and Bryson, Joanna and Dignum, Frank and Dignum, Virginia and Grobelnik, Marko and Hoos, Holger and Irgens, Morten and Lukowicz, Paul and Muller, Catelijne and Rossi, Francesca and Shawe-Taylor, John and Theodorou, Andreas and Vinuesa, Ricardo}, title = {From Fear to Action: AI Governance and Opportunities for All}, series = {Frontiers in Computer Science}, volume = {5}, journal = {Frontiers in Computer Science}, doi = {10.3389/fcomp.2023.1210421}, language = {en} } @article{BackovskyBryson, author = {Backovsky, David and Bryson, Joanna}, title = {Going Nuclear? Precedents and Options for the Transnational Governance of AI}, series = {Horizons}, journal = {Horizons}, number = {Summer 2023, No.24}, issn = {2406-0402}, pages = {84 -- 95}, language = {en} } @article{Bryson, author = {Bryson, Joanna}, title = {Margaret Boden obituary: cognitive scientist who explored how machines might emulate human imagination}, series = {Nature}, volume = {644}, journal = {Nature}, number = {8077}, publisher = {Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, doi = {10.1038/d41586-025-02548-0}, pages = {603 -- 603}, language = {en} } @article{Bryson, author = {Bryson, Joanna}, title = {Human Experience and AI Regulation: What European Union Law Brings to Digital Technology Ethics}, series = {Weizenbaum Journal of the Digital Society}, volume = {3}, journal = {Weizenbaum Journal of the Digital Society}, number = {3}, issn = {2748-5625}, doi = {10.34669/WI.WJDS/3.3.8}, abstract = {Although nearly all artificial intelligence (AI) regulatory documents now reference the importance of human-centering digital systems, we frequently see AI ethics itself reduced to limited concerns, such as bias and, sometimes, power consumption. Although their impacts on human lives and our ecosystem render both of these absolutely critical, the ethical and regulatory challenges and obligations relating to AI do not stop there. Joseph Weizenbaum described the potential abuse of intelligent systems to make inhuman cruelty and acts of war more emotionally accessible to human operators. But more than this, he highlighted the need to solve the social issues that facilitate violent acts of war, and the immense potential the use of computers offers in this context. The present article reviews how the EU's digital regulatory legislation—well enforced—could help us address such concerns. I begin by reviewing why the EU leads in this area, considering the legitimacy of its actions both regionally and globally. I then review the legislation already protecting us—the General Data Protection Regulation, the Digital Services Act, and the Digital Markets Act—and consider their roles in achieving Weizenbaum's goals. Finally, I consider the almost-promulgated AI Act before concluding with a brief discussion of the potential for future enforcement and global regulatory cooperation.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{MellmannArbuzovaKontogiorgosetal., author = {Mellmann, Heinrich and Arbuzova, Polina and Kontogiorgos, Dimosthenis and Yordanova, Magdalena and Haensel, Jennifer X. and Hafner, Verena V. and Bryson, Joanna}, title = {Effects of Transparency in Humanoid Robots - A Pilot Study}, series = {Companion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction}, booktitle = {Companion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction}, publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery}, address = {New York, NY, USA}, isbn = {9798400703232}, doi = {10.1145/3610978.3640613}, pages = {750 -- 754}, abstract = {Transparency is recognized as a vital feature for understanding and predicting robot behavior. Another feature that affects interaction with robots is their anthropomorphism. The relationship between these remains under-explored but is postulated to be negative. We present a pilot study investigating the effects of robot transparency in human-robot interactions, where the robot has an anthropomorphic appearance. We asked participants to evaluate and interact with the humanoid robot Pepper to examine whether visualizing the robot's goals and behavior affects perceived intelligence, anthropomorphism, and robot agency. Our preliminary findings suggest that users may attribute higher ratings of agency when interacting with a robot visualizing its goals. In this late-breaking report, we propose our experiment on the interplay between transparency and anthropomorphism in human-robot interaction and summarize insights from our preliminary pilot study.}, language = {en} }