• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Minerva >The Ethics Ecosystem: Personal Ethics, Network Governance and Regulating Actors Governing the Use of Social Media Research Data
【24h】

The Ethics Ecosystem: Personal Ethics, Network Governance and Regulating Actors Governing the Use of Social Media Research Data

机译：道德生态系统：个人道德，网络治理和规范使用社交媒体研究数据的行为主体

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This paper examines the consequences of a culture of "personal ethics" when using new methodologies, such as the use of social media (SM) sites as a source of data for research. Using SM research as an example, this paper explores the practices of a number of actors and researchers within the "Ethics Ecosystem" which as a network governs ethically responsible research behaviour. In the case of SM research, the ethical use of this data is currently in dispute, as even though it is seemingly publically available, concerns relating to privacy, vulnerability, potential harm and consent blur the lines of responsible ethical research behaviour. The findings point to the dominance of a personal, bottom-up, researcher-led, 'ethical barometer' for making decisions regarding the permissibility of using SM data. We show that the use of different barometers by different researchers can lead to wide disparities in ethical practice - disparities which are compounded by the lack of firm guidelines for responsible practice of SM research. This has widespread consequences on the development of shared norms and understandings at all levels, and by all actors within the Ethics Ecosystem, and risks inconsistencies in their approaches to ethical decision-making. This paper argues that this governance of ethical behaviour by individual researchers perpetuates a negative cycle of academic practice that is dependent on subjective judgements by researchers themselves, rather than governed by more formalised academic institutions such as the research ethics committee and funding council guidelines.
机译：本文研究了使用新方法（例如使用社交媒体（SM）网站作为研究数据源）时“个人伦理”文化的后果。以SM研究为例，本文探讨了“伦理生态系统”中许多参与者和研究人员的实践，该网络作为一个网络，负责道德负责的研究行为。就SM研究而言，该数据的伦理用途目前存在争议，即使它似乎是公开可用的，但与隐私，脆弱性，潜在危害和同意有关的担忧却模糊了负责任的伦理研究行为。研究结果表明，由个人领导，自下而上，由研究人员主导的“道德晴雨表”在决定是否允许使用SM数据方面占主导地位。我们表明，不同的研究人员使用不同的晴雨表会导致道德实践中的巨大差异，而这种差异又由于缺乏可靠的SM研究实践指南而变得更加严重。这对各个层面以及道德生态系统内所有参与者的共同规范和谅解的发展产生了广泛的影响，并在道德决策方法上存在不一致的风险。本文认为，个体研究者对道德行为的这种治理使学术实践的消极循环永久存在，这取决于研究者自身的主观判断，而不是由研究伦理委员会和资助委员会指南等更正规的学术机构所支配。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Minerva》 |2019年第3期|317-343|共27页
  • 作者

    Samuel Gabrielle; Derrick Gemma E.; van Leeuwen Thed;

  • 作者单位

    Univ Lancaster Ctr Higher Educ Res & Evaluat HERE Educ Res Lancaster LA1 4YD England|Kings Coll London Dept Global Hlth & Social Med Strand Campus London WC2R 2LS England;

    Univ Lancaster Ctr Higher Educ Res & Evaluat HERE Educ Res Lancaster LA1 4YD England;

    Leiden Univ Ctr Sci & Technol Studies NL-2300 Leiden Netherlands;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Evaluation; Governance; Research ethics; Social media; Ethics; Internet research;

    机译：评估;治理;研究伦理;社交媒体;伦理;互联网研究;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号