Behavioral data collection succeeded only when conducted without subjects’ awareness

Evidence

Pentland and his crew continued to develop the sociometer and its applications, and by 2013 the device had been used by dozens of research groups and companies, including members of the Fortune 1000. A 2014 study, authored with Waber and colleagues from Harvard and Northeastern University, quantified gender differences in interaction patterns. The success of the analysis occasioned this announcement: “It is now possible to actively instrument human behavior to collect detailed data on various dimensions of social interaction.” The authors signaled their aim to employ MacKay’s cardinal rule of unobtrusive surveillance for effective monitoring of herds, flocks, and packs, acknowledging that the continuous pervasive collection of human behavioral data could succeed only when conducted outside the boundaries of human awareness, thus eliminating possible resistance, just as we saw at Facebook. — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 1352

Categorization

• XREF: Directly extends the Facebook chapter’s earlier point about the necessity of unobtrusive data collection, and ties to MacKay’s older cybernetics tradition. — connects to: Apps collect data beyond user control while framing collection as enhanced experience — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection: How Data Is…, 517; Until recently no instruments existed to automatically model face-to-face social interaction — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 1338; Behavioral data captured passively is held to be more truthful than self-revelation — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 1346 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Behavioral modification works best when targets stay unaware #corroborates (0.90) — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 962