CRII: SaTC: A Contextual Integrity Approach for Privacy Reasoning Regarding Performance Tracking Technologies in US College Athletics

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

College athletics are organized athletic programs and competitions in higher education institutions across the United States. College athletic departments have increasingly adopted various technologies to track sports performance, often through wearable devices that collect student athletes’ biometric data (e.g., heart rate, oxygen consumption). Despite the potential to enhance training and reduce injuries, these performance tracking technologies gather various personal data from student athletes that may violate their privacy. This project examines the complex data privacy issues associated with these technologies in college athletics and develops strategies to leverage these technologies without compromising student athletes’ data privacy.This project applies the privacy framework of contextual integrity to comprehensively analyze contextual data privacy issues regarding using performance tracking technologies in college athletics. Specifically, the research team draws on existing research in computing, bioethics, laws, sports medicine, and health informatics to create a consistent multidisciplinary taxonomy for analyzing data privacy around performance tracking technologies. Then, the team conducts interview and survey research with student athletes and coaches to identify potentially privacy-intrusive data practices and to articulate the utility-privacy tradeoff of adopting these technologies. Finally, the team collaborates with the athletic department at their institution to develop research-driven privacy strategies for adopting performance tracking technologies. The project outcomes widen the application of the privacy framework of contextual integrity in the context of college athletics and improve student athletes’ overall well-being by minimizing potential privacy harms.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.