Abstract
This chapter addresses issues of ethical research practice in the context of the recently emerging range of methods which use the Internet to support the creation of primary research data — variously referred to as online methods, digital methods and Internet-mediated research (IMR) (here, the latter term will be used). Social and behavioural researchers started devising and piloting IMR methods from around the mid-1990s, with surveys, experiments, interviews and observational studies all being represented in early pioneering attempts (e.g. Hewson, 1994; Bordia, 1996). Since then, IMR methods have flourished, expanding in volume, interdisciplinary reach and range of methodological approaches (as discussed in the introduction to this book). In particular, the emergence of ‘Web 2.0’, as discussed in Chapter 1, has facilitated the recent expansion of unobtrusive methods, including those involving data ‘mining’ or ‘harvesting’ (often requiring the use of complex computer algorithms), which can lead to what have become known as ‘big data’ sets (see Part I, this book). Such unobtrusive approaches, which make use of the digital traces of peoples’ online behaviours (typically, without obtaining consent), have led to debates regarding what is appropriate ethical practice in an IMR context; in particular, a salient issue has been the distinction between what should be considered ‘private’ and ‘in the public domain’ in an online context.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Bordia, P. (1996) ‘Studying verbal interaction on the Internet’, Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 28(2): 149–151.
BPS (2013) Report of the Working Party on Conducting Research on the Internet: Ethics Guidelines for Internet-Mediated Research. British Psychological Society, INF206/1.2013, http://www.bps.org.uk/system/files/Public%20files/inf206-guidelines-for-internet-mediated-research.pdf.
Brotsky, S.R. and Giles, D. (2007) ‘Inside the “Pro-ana” community: A covert online participant observation’, Eating Disorders: The Journal of Treatment and Prevention 15(2), 93–109.
Brownlow, C. and O’Dell, L. (2002) ‘Ethical issues for qualitative research in on-line communities’, Disability and Society, 17(6), 685–94.
Ess, C. (2007) ‘Internet research ethics’, in A. Joinson, K. McKenna, U. Reips and T. Postmes (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Internet Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.487–502.
Ferri, B. (2000) ‘The hidden cost of difference: Women with learning disabilities’, Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10(3), 129–38.
Fox, N., Ward, K. and O’Rourke, A. (2005) ‘Pro-anorexia, weight-loss drugs and the Internet: an “anti recovery” explanatory model of anorexia’, Sociology of Health and Illness, 27(7), 944–71.
Frankel, M. and Siang, S. (1999) Ethical and Legal Issues of Human Subjects Research on the Internet — Report of a Workshop. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, http://www.aaas.org/spp/sfrl/projects/intres/report.pdf date accessed January 2013.
The Guardian (2014) ‘Facebook reveals news feed experiment to control emotions’, The Guardian, 30 June 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/29/facebook-users-emotions-news-feeds.
Hessler, R. M., Downing, J., Beltz, C., Pelliccio, A., Powell, M., and Vale, W. (2003) ‘Qualitative research on adolescent risk using email: A methodological assessment’, Qualitative Sociology, 26(1), 111–24.
Hewson, C.M. (1994) ‘Empirical evidence regarding the folk psychological concept of belief’, in Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Atlanta, Georgia, pp.403–408.
Hewson, C.M., Yule, P., Laurent, D. and Vogel, C.M. (2003) Internet Research Methods: A Practical Guide for the Social and Behavioural Sciences. London: Sage.
Hudson, J. and Bruckman, A. (2004) ‘“Go Away”: Participant objections to being studied and the ethics of chatroom research’, The Information Society, 20(2), 127–39.
International Journal of Internet Research Ethics (IJIRE) (n.d.) http://ijire.net/.
Kraut, R., Olson, J., Banaji, M., Bruckman, A., Cohen, J. and Cooper, M. (2004) ‘Psychological research online: Report of board of scientific affairs’ advisory group on the conduct of research on the Internet’, American Psychologist, 59(4), 1–13.
Madge, C. and O’Connor, H. (2002) ‘On-line with e-mums: Exploring the Internet as a medium for research’, Area, 34(1), 92–102.
Markham, A. and Buchanan, E. (2012) Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research. Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee (version 2), http://www.aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf.
National Centre for Research Methods (NCRM) (n.d.) ‘Online Research Ethics’, Exploring Online Research Methods http://www.restore.ac.uk/orm/ethics/ethcontents.htm.
Online Psychology Research UK (OPR UK) (n.d.) http://www.onlinepsychresearch.co.uk.
Peden, B.F. and Flashinski, D.P. (2004) ‘Virtual research ethics: A content analysis of surveys and experiments online’, in E. Buchanan (ed.) Readings in Virtual Research Ethics: Issues and Controversies. Hershey, PA: Information Science Pub, pp.1–26.
Reid, E. (1996) ‘Informed consent in the study of online communities: A reflection on the effect of computer-mediated social research’, Information Society, 12, 169–74.
Reips, U.-D. and Buffardi, L. E. (2012) ‘Studying migrants with the help of the Internet: Methods from psychology’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38(9): 1405–24.
Rodham, K. and Gavin, J. (2006) ‘The ethics of using the Internet to collect qualitative research data’, Research Ethics Review, 2(3), 92–7.
Rodino, M. (1997) ‘Breaking out of binaries: Reconceptualizing gender and its relationship to language’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(3), http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue3/rodino.html, date accessed January 2013.
Tackett-Gibson, M. (2008) ‘Constructions of risk and harm in online discussions of ketamine use’, Addiction Research and Theory, 16(3), 245–57.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 Claire Hewson
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hewson, C. (2016). Ethics Issues in Digital Methods Research. In: Snee, H., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S., Watson, H. (eds) Digital Methods for Social Science. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137453662_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137453662_13
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-55862-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-45366-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)