ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)
Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search into
Filter by Categories
Research ethics committees
Research integrity

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesInternational

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Digital, Social & Mobile Worldwide in 2015 (Papers: Kemp S 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on January 10, 2016
 

“2014 was a landmark year for growth across all things digital, and We Are Social’s new Digital, Social and Mobile in 2015 report indicates that this year will see even more impressive numbers.

Including stats for more than 240 countries around the world, and profiling 30 of the world’s biggest economies in detail, this report is the most comprehensive, free compendium of up-to-date digital statistics and data you’ll find.

So what do its 376 pages reveal?”

Kemp S (2015) Digital, Social & Mobile Worldwide in 2015 Retrieved from http://wearesocial.com.au/blog/2015/01/22/digital-social-mobile-worldwide-2015/ (accessed 1 December 2015)

(Reference from the updated Booklet 37 of the Griffith University Research Ethics Manual. Perpetual licences are available for use by all researchers within an institution. Institutions have used the GUREM as the basis for producing their own research ethics manual, as a professional development resource and a teaching and learning materials for HDR candidates.)

#SocialEthics: A guide to embedding ethics in social media research (Papers: Evans et al 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on January 9, 2016
 

“This report on social media research ethics is a part of the Wisdom of the Crowd project, sponsored by Innovate UK, the UK’s innovation agency, with funding contributions from the TSB, the EPSRC and the ESRC. lpsos MORI, CASM Consulting LLP, Demos and University of Sussex have collaborated in this project to critically examine commercial possibilities for social media research.

Given that this report was published quite some time before the Cambridge Analytica story broke, its reflections on information published to social media and express consent being necessary for research use, are likely still to be relevant.

One of the focuses of the Wisdom of the Crowd project is to examine the ethical landscape surrounding aggregated social media research. In spring 2015, the first publication of this ethics strand contained a review of the legal and regulatory framework for using social media in market research2. This second and final report builds on these findings, presenting our conclusions from quantitative and qualitative primary research with stakeholders and social media users, and outlining our recommendations for how the research industry should look to proceed if it is to be at the forefront of using social media data in an ethical way.
.
The scope of the ethical review is focussed on large-scale, aggregated analysis of social media data sometimes referred to as ‘social l istening’. We regard this kind of research as potentially fruitful in the social insight it can be provide, and we are generally excited about the possibilities for this a new social research methodology; however, we are concerned that the guidelines for ethical best practice are incoherent and inadequate. The volume of data collected through this method presents barriers to traditional ethical research frameworks: this new kind of research also fits into the wider ethical context of using algorithms to analyse people’s personal data. Consideration therefore needs to be given to how this kind of research can be conducted ethically.”
.

Harry Evans; Steve Ginnis; Jamie Bartlett (2015) #SocialEthics: A guide to embedding ethics in social media research. Retrieved from: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/migrations/en-uk/files/Assets/Docs/Publications/im-demos-social-ethics-in-social-media-research-summary.pdf  (accessed 13 November 2018).
.

(Reference from the updated Booklet 37 of the Griffith University Research Ethics Manual. Perpetual licences are available for use by all researchers within an institution. Institutions have used the GUREM as the basis for producing their own research ethics manual, as a professional development resource and a teaching and learning materials for HDR candidates.)

Facebook fiasco: was Cornell’s study of ‘emotional contagion’ an ethics breach? – The Guardian (Chris Chamber 2014)0

Posted by Admin in on January 9, 2016
 

“It’s become farcical. Whoever we ask, nobody seems to know anything. Did the study have ethical approval? First the answer was yes. Then it was no. Then it was maybe. Then it was no again. Was it funded by the US army? First the university said yes. Then it said no, without explanation. Why did the scientific journal not state whether the study was ethically approved, as required by its own policy? Sorry, editor Susan Fiske told me, I’m too busy to answer that question.

I’m referring of course to the study published last week by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, in which researchers from Facebook and Cornell University teamed up to study “emotional contagion”. Over a one-week period in 2012, they changed the content of news feeds for a random sample of Facebook users. For one group of users they removed content that contained positive words, for another group they removed content that contained negative words. They then measured whether subtly biasing the emotional content in this way changed the emotional content of status updates by the users. Sure enough it did. Making feeds more negative led to more negative behaviour, and vice versa.

Scientifically, the study is remarkable in some ways and unremarkable in others. The sample size of 689,003 is truly huge – possibly the largest in the history of psychology. And the results are interesting insofar as they show that very small changes in the emotional state of our environment can have knock-on effects for how we act (and presumably how we feel) in social networks. On the other hand, the effects in the study are minuscule, among the smallest statistically significant results ever published. As psychologist Tal Yarkoni has pointed out, were the effects to be expressed in terms of average human height, they would have an effect of just one 20th of an inch across the entire male population of the United States.”

Chamber C (2014, 1 July) Facebook fiasco: was Cornell’s study of ‘emotional contagion’ an ethics breach? The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2014/jul/01/facebook-cornell-study-emotional-contagion-ethics-breach (accessed 5 December 2015)

(Reference from the updated Booklet 37 of the Griffith University Research Ethics Manual. Perpetual licences are available for use by all researchers within an institution. Institutions have used the GUREM as the basis for producing their own research ethics manual, as a professional development resource and a teaching and learning materials for HDR candidates.)

Also see
1. (25/03/14) Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks
2. (01/04/14) Facebook fiasco: was Cornell’s study of ‘emotional contagion’ an ethics breach? 
3. (10/05/15) Social media personhood as a challenge to research ethics: Exploring the case of the Facebook experiment
4. (10/05/15) Untangling research and practice: What Facebook’s “emotional contagion” study teaches us
5. (20/05/16) Scientists are just as confused about the ethics of big-data research as you
6. (17/06/16) Are Research Ethics Obsolete In The Era Of Big Data?

Computer Science Security Research and Human Subjects: Emerging Considerations for Research Ethics Boards (Papers: Buchanan et al 2011)0

Posted by Admin in on January 9, 2016
 

Abstract: This paper explores the growing concerns with computer science research, and in particular, computer security research and its relationship with the committees that review human subjects research. It offers cases that review boards are likely to confront, and provides a context for appropriate consideration of such research, as issues of bots, clouds, and worms enter the discourse of human subjects review.

Buchanan E, Aycock J, Dexter S, Dittrich D and Hvizdak E (2011) Computer Science Security Research and Human Subjects: Emerging Considerations for Research Ethics Boards. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal 6(2): 71-83
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jer.2011.6.2.71

(Reference from the updated Booklet 37 of the Griffith University Research Ethics Manual. Perpetual licences are available for use by all researchers within an institution. Institutions have used the GUREM as the basis for producing their own research ethics manual, as a professional development resource and a teaching and learning materials for HDR candidates.)

0