Wednesday, August 24, 2016

Curtis Jessop is a Senior Researcher at NatCen Social Research and is the Network Lead for the NSMNSS network

I’m playing catch-up a little bit here, but thought I’d share some thoughts on a presentation from Professor Woodrow Hartzog (slides here) at an ethics symposium I attended on 19th July hosted by the Web Science Institute.

The presentation focussed on the ethics of how our data are collected online, arguing that insufficient attention is paid to the design of information technology. Giving a number of examples of how IT had failed ethically at a design stage, Professor Hartzog challenged the idea that ‘there are no bad technologies, only bad users’, asserting that there is no such thing as neutral design.

Following this thought, he suggested that the principle of giving users control (e.g. over privacy settings) does not reflect how people actually use technology and can be overwhelming (managing all settings for all accounts), or even manipulated to disguise/protect true intentions. This principle puts too much onus on the user, when the responsibility should lie with the designers.

I think this is an under-considered area in ethics of social media research. When we think about ‘data collection’, we are more likely to think about how we get the data out of its original context, but there is of course a stage before that: when the data was collected by the original platform. As researchers we are unlikely to have control over the design of our ‘data source’, but to what extent should we be considering it?

My second thought was that a lot of these principles translate over to research ethics – the design of a methodology is not neutral, and giving research participants control is not necessarily sufficient (or appropriate). As researchers the onus should be on us to ensure the design is ethically sound and protects the participant’s interests.

Overall, this event felt to me more rooted in data science than social science; in the advance materials I received for this event, it was suggested that ‘Principles of informed consent and anonymity in this environment are no longer the answer’and I can’t say I’m convinced of that. However, given the often necessarily inter-disciplinary nature of social media research, it is important that these perspectives are included and this did give me plenty to think about.


I should also say that the second keynote given by Professor Mireille Hildebrandt (slides here) which looked at the ethics of data-sharing through philosophical and legal lenses was excellent, as was the panel discussion in between. For more information on the event, have a look here, and there are a couple of other blogs from the event here and here

0 komentar:

Post a Comment

LightBlog

BTemplates.com

Categories

#BigData (1) #bookofblogs (6) #einterview (5) #nsmnss (21) #SoMeEthics (2) AHRC (1) Amy Aisha Brown (2) analysis (2) analytics (1) API (1) auxiliary data source (1) Big Data (8) big data analytics (1) blog (14) blogging (7) blogs (8) Book of blogs (3) book review (8) case studies (1) Christian Fuchs (1) coders (1) cognition (1) community (2) community of practice (1) computer mediated (1) conference (3) content analysis (1) crowdsourcing (3) data (1) data access (1) Data Base Management System (1) data linkage (1) data protection (1) definitions (4) demographics (1) Dhiraj Murthy (1) digital (3) digital convergence (1) Digital debate (7) digital humanities (1) dissemination (1) Dr Chareen Snelson (2) Dr Sarah-Louise Quinnell (1) Dr Steve Jones (1) e interviews (2) e-privacy (1) ECR (1) einterview (2) empathy (1) Eran Fisher. (1) ESRC (2) ethics (13) event (3) facebook (3) fanfiction (1) funding (2) Geert Lovink (1) graduate (3) guidelines (5) hootsuite (1) HR (1) identity (3) impact (1) imputation (1) international research (2) janet salmons (7) Japanese (1) Jenna Condie (1) jobs (1) Katheleen McNiff (2) Language (1) learning (1) linguistic anthropology (1) Make Money (2) Mark Carrigan (1) market research (2) media (2) methods (1) mixed methods (1) natcen (1) NCapture (1) netnography (2) network (3) Networked Researcher (1) networked spaces (2) new media (2) NVivo (2) Online (2) online communities (1) online footprint (2) online interview research (2) online personas (2) online research (2) organisational management (1) ownership (1) Paolo Gerbaudo (1) phd (2) PhDBlogger (2) politics (1) power (1) privacy (4) QSR International (1) Qualitative (4) qualitative research methods (6) Quantitative (4) Recruitment (1) research (8) research methods (8) researcher (2) RSS (1) RTI International (3) rumours (1) SAGE (1) Sampling (3) semantic analysis (1) semantics (1) sentiment (1) sentiment accuracy (1) Sherry Turkle (1) small data (1) small datasets (1) social media (36) Social Media MA (10) Social Media Managment System (1) social media monitoring tools (2) social media research (12) social science (4) Social Science Space (2) social scientists (6) social tensionn (1) sociolinguistics (1) sociology (3) software (2) statistics (1) Stories (1) storify (1) surveillance (2) survey (4) teaching (2) technologies (4) tools (2) trust (1) tweet chat (11) Twitter (20) University of Westminster (13) user views (1) video interview (7) vlogging (9) web team (4) webinar (2) weighting (1) YouTube (10)
Responsive Ads Here

Recent

Recent Posts

Navigation List

Popular Posts

Blog Archive