- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

youth and ict, world bank report
by Jeremy Hunsinger 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

http://iris37.worldbank.org/domdoc/PRD/Other/PRDDContainer.nsf/All +Documents/85256D2400766CC785257298005AA016/$File/ Youth_ICTs_Development.pdf by David J. McKenzie Jeremy Hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu) Words are things; and a small drop of ink, falling like dew upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think. --Byron

1 0

Dissertation
by brook bolander 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

Dear AOIR, I am writing my PhD on the subject of "power in blogs", and thereby exploring how power is negotiated in the interaction between bloggers and their readers, and between the readers themselves in the comments sections of blog posts in which conflicts are salient. I have received an initial e-mail confirmation from the bloggers that they consent to my research and have given them the option of requiring me to use psuedonyms. I now intend to write to the bloggers, asking for their addresses, so I can outline the project in more detail and obtain written consent. I am aware, however, that research on the internet can be very complicated in terms of ethical issues. What I am less sure about are the legal issues. Am I correct in assuming that if I do not include quotations, use pseudonyms for the readers (whose permission I have not gained), use pseudonyms for those bloggers who ask me to (one blogger has explicitly asked me not to), gain written consent from the bloggers themselves and inform them in the letter what the study entails, that I will run into no ethical or legal problems? All my bloggers state they are adults. Or do I need to write to the hosts as well, like blogger, for example, to ask for their permission as well? One of the bloggers asked me whether she would have any problems vis à vis her readers if she consented to my study, for example, and I found I didn't really know, with any certainty, what to reply. I hope that my PhD will be published in a couple of years, and am not sure whether that plays a role in terms of its label as something for 'commerical purposes'. I am writing my PhD in Switzerland. I really want to go about this the right way and am having problems gaining the information I need. Thanks a lot in advance for your help, Best wishes Brook Bolander

19 45

New Media: The Press Freedom Dimension conference publication from unesco
by Jeremy Hunsinger 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001520/152017e.pdf jeremy hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu) wiki.tmttlt.com www.tmttlt.com () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments http://www.stswiki.org/ sts wiki http://cfp.learning-inquiry.info/ Learning Inquiry-the journal http://transdisciplinarystudies.tmttlt.com/ Transdisciplinary Studies:the book series

1 0

Re: [Air-L] research regs.
by Marj Kibby 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

Ed, Doesn't this say clearly that if the blog (publicly available) already exists before your study begins, and was not set up for the purpose of your study then it is exempt? Marj Dr Marjorie Kibby, Senior Lecturer in Communication & Culture Faculty of Education and Arts The University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Marj.Kibby(a)newcastle.edu.au +61 2 49216604 >>> Ed Lamoureux <ell(a)bumail.bradley.edu> 08/12/07 12:35 PM >>> 4. Research involving the collection or study of existing data, documents, records . . . if these sources are publicly available OR if the information is recorded by the investigator in such a maner that subjects cannot be identified, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects. Note: in order to be eligible for this exemption, all data, documents, records, or specimens must exist prior to IRB review and must have been collected for purposes other than the proposed research. (To qualify for an exemption in this category, the proposed research must be strictly retrospective).

4 3

Re: [Air-L] research regs.
by Marj Kibby 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

I thought we were discussing textual analysis (of online texts) not ethnography. If I am analysing a public forum/blog/wiki,facebook site in which I do not intervene then no ethics clearance is necessary. It is a published document. If I question or comment in the forum only then does it become human subject research - I am intervening in their lives - but it would still qualify for expedited clearance as low-risk, being public. Marj Dr Marjorie Kibby, Senior Lecturer in Communication & Culture Faculty of Education and Arts The University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Marj.Kibby(a)newcastle.edu.au +61 2 49216604 >>> Ed Lamoureux <ell(a)bumail.bradley.edu> 08/12/07 12:35 PM >>> I think this is an IRB that pretty clearly understands, via experience, ethnographic methods.

2 1

cfp + cfp + Journal of Electronic Commerce Research: Special Issue on Virtual Worlds + cf + cfp
by Marc Fetscherin 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

JOURNAL OF ELECTRONIC COMMERCE RESEARCH: SPECIAL ISSUE ON VIRTUAL WORLDS CALL FOR PAPERS Special Issue on Virtual Worlds Submissions due: November 1, 2007 Scheduled Publication date: August 2008 Overview: The emergence of virtual worlds and Web 3.D change the way of doing business. Web 3.D is the synonym for Internet-based virtual worlds, where people can create own 3-D *virtual* personalities. Virtual Worlds such as Second Life and others are undergoing an evolution similar to that of the Internet in the mid nineties and might impact profoundly the way people cooperate, communicate, collaborate, and conduct business. The recent entering of companies such as Toyota, American Apparel, Nissan, or Adidas indicate the upcoming role of this platform for the next generation of conducting electronic business. This call for papers is intended to cover a wide range of business and research topics that fall within the broad description of activities, challenges, opportunities, applications, innovations and implications associated with Virtual Worlds as the emerging new online business landscape. Purpose of the Special Issue: The purpose of this special issue is to encourage discussion and communication of important research issues that underpin Virtual Worlds as an important aspect of e-commerce and to showcase interesting and significant research work in this critical area. Specifically this issues is focusing on business and legal issues of doing business in Virtual Worlds. Of particular relevance to the described focus are papers about business models, marketing, promotion, pricing, customer integration, consumer behavior, legal, cultural and cross-cultural research. The issue, however, will not be restricted to these topics; rather, it welcomes reports of theoretical or empirical research that examines pertinent business issues related to Virtual Worlds e-commerce. This special issue will be of interest to researchers, governments, small and large businesses, marketing and PR companies among others. List of possible topics are: * Product Development and Testing in Virtual Worlds * Image, Branding, Advertising in Virtual Worlds * Marketing in Virtual World * Avatar-based Marketing * Promotion of Virtual Goods in Virtual Worlds * Pricing of Virtual Goods in Virtual Worlds * Selling, Cross-Selling Real and Virtual Worlds * Business Planning for Non-profits in Virtual Worlds * Fundraising and Virtual Worlds * Convergence of Real and Virtual Worlds * Customer Integration and Virtual Worlds * Technology, Business, Strategy in Virtual Worlds * Financial Systems, Investments, Currency Exchange Real and Virtual Worlds * Emerging Media Presence in Virtual Worlds * Consumer Behavior, Consumer Acceptance and Virtual Worlds * Trust, Cross-Cultural Studies and Virtual Worlds * Intellectual Property, Copyright, Trademarks and Virtual Worlds Submission of Manustcript: JECR publishes original empirical research, theoretical and methodological articles, evaluative and integrative reviews, field research, business surveys, and application papers of interest to a general readership. A submission based on a paper appearing elsewhere (such as conference proceedings or newsletters) must have major value-added extensions to the earlier version. For conference papers, it should have at least 30% new material. The submitted manuscripts should follow the format as suggested in the Submission Guideline found in the journal website: http://www.csulb.edu/journals/jecr/s_guide.htm. Of particular note is that the manuscript should be prepared in Microsoft Word format. The names, affiliations, and contact information (i.e., phone, fax, email addresses) of all authors should be provided only on the cover page. The submitted paper will undergo a double-blind review. Contributing authors may be asked to serve as reviewers for the special issue. Authors may submit completed manuscripts electronically at any time prior to November 1st 2007 deadline. Manuscripts and questions send to mfetscherin(a)rollins.edu. Guest Editor Marc Fetscherin, Ph.D. Rollins College International Business Department Winter Park, 32789, FL, USA e-mail: mfetscherin(a)rollins.edu Tel: +1 407 691 1759 Fax: +1 407 646 1566 Important Dates: Deadline for Submission: November 1, 2007 Paper acceptance/rejection: January 15, 2008 Revised paper submission: March 15, 2008 Final acceptance following revisions: May 15, 2008 Publication Date: August 2008

1 1

Re: [Air-L] Survey completion rate
by Philipp Budka 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

Dear List and Holly, Interestingly both of my survey, I have currently up running have a completion rate of about 80%. Even though they differ in length, topic and number of participants. I also found that inviting potential respondents via e-mail is not fostering participation. What are your experiences with motivating participants? Best, Philipp Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 12:57:36 -0500 From: Holly Kruse <holly-kruse(a)utulsa.edu> Subject: [Air-L] Survey completion rate To: <air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org> I currently have an online survey underway, and as it slogs along, it has made me curious about something. What, generally, do people find to be the completion rate of their online surveys? This is a stat to which I probably wouldn't have access in a traditional paper survey -- I wouldn't be able to differentiate between people who started the questionnaire and didn't complete it, and those who just didn't fill it out at all -- so it's an interesting feature of this survey format. I'm finding that so far, with my survey the completion rate is hovering around 80%. Is that similar to others' experiences? (...) But I am curious to hear about completion rates of others' online surveys. Holly -- Philipp Budka philbu(a)gmx.net Dreyhausenstraße 18/7 A-1140 Wien, Austria http://www.philbu.net -- Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kanns mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger

1 0

part 2 of 2
by Ed Lamoureux 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

4. Research involving the collection or study of existing data, documents, records . . . if these sources are publicly available or if the information is recorded by the investigator in such a maner that subjects cannot be identified, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects. Note: in order to be eligible for this exemption, all data, documents, records, or specimens must exist prior to IRB review and must have been collected for purposes other than the proposed research. (To qualify for an exemption in this category, the proposed research must be strictly retrospective). Later in the boxed summary sections: 5. Please explain how confidentiality will be maintained during and after data collection. If appropriate, address confidentiality of data collected via e-mail, web interfaces, computer servers and other networked information. 7. Individually identifiable information. Will any identifiable information, including images of subjects, be published, shared, or otherwise disseminated? . . . NOTE: if yes, subjects must provide explicit consent or assent for such dissemination . . . Elsewhere, copy of their informed consent requirements: http:// www.irb.uiuc.edu/?q=informed-consent/ElementsOfInformedConsent.html +++ we can, then, quibble a bit over what is or isn't public and you may not be forced to stay within UI's parameters that the data be "historic," But my point is, and has been all along, that working in the field does not exempt one from confidentiality, informed consent, and protection of subjects. One might, for various reasons, get off the hook for SOME of it . . . but when the data used can be traced back to individuals (and MUCH web published data CAN BE). . . I think in most places, using that data without prior informed consent might well be frowned upon by many IRB committees. GAWD I hope this makes it through the list's 10k limit. I'm having a lot of trouble making meaningful points around that limit. [obviously, it did not] Edward Lee Lamoureux, Ph. D.

2 1

part one of two
by Ed Lamoureux 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

sorry, but I have to break this into two parts as the 10k limit caught me again please allow me to stop arguing in the abstract for a moment [I sort of gravitate toward hypotheticals] If you have a chance, have a look a the U of Illinois, IRB protection of human subjects stuff at http://www.irb.uiuc.edu/ http://www.irb.uiuc.edu/?q=irb-admin/introduction.html Especially helpful is the download of the "NEW" IRB Application for Exemption. This is the document that controls the process, for the U. of I., of telling researchers that they can go ahead and do what they plan to do cause it fits under the Federal categories for exemption from full review. Even getting the research approved via this form does not release the researcher from best practices; but it does recognize that certain kinds of work (descriptive, observational, etc.) are in a category that pose little risk to subjects so may be done without full board review and constant, repetitive, oversight. before I highlight a couple parts, please note that I'm not at the U of I . . . I'm only familiar with their stuff cause I treat them as a model due to their longstanding involvement with ethnography. See their long term ethnography of the university project: http://www.eotu.uiuc.edu/what/index.htm I think this is an IRB that pretty clearly understands, via experience, ethnographic methods. These guys don't make law for everyone. But I think they are a good model and they are breaking ground in the attempted colocation of human subject protection stuff across disciplines. Some highlights in the application for exemption: *NEW* IRB Application for Exemption: http://www.irb.uiuc.edu/files/ exemptform.dot (this will open as a fillable form in WORD) Edward Lee Lamoureux, Ph. D. Associate Professor, Multimedia Program and Department of Communication Co-Director, New Media Center 1501 W. Bradley Bradley University Peoria IL 61625 309-677-2378 <http://slane.bradley.edu/com/faculty/lamoureux/website2/index.html> <http://gcc.bradley.edu/mm/> AIM/IM & skype: dredleelam Second Life: Professor Beliveau

1 0

research regs.
by Ed Lamoureux 12 Aug '07

12 Aug '07

please allow me to stop arguing in the abstract for a moment [I sort of gravitate toward hypotheticals] If you have a chance, have a look a the U of Illinois, IRB protection of human subjects stuff at http://www.irb.uiuc.edu/ http://www.irb.uiuc.edu/?q=irb-admin/introduction.html Especially helpful is the download of the "NEW" IRB Application for Exemption. This is the document that controls the process, for the U. of I., of telling researchers that they can go ahead and do what they plan to do cause it fits under the Federal categories for exemption from full review. Even getting the research approved via this form does not release the researcher from best practices; but it does recognize that certain kinds of work (descriptive, observational, etc.) are in a category that pose little risk to subjects so may be done without full board review and constant, repetitive, oversight. before I highlight a couple parts, please note that I'm not at the U of I . . . I'm only familiar with their stuff cause I treat them as a model due to their longstanding involvement with ethnography. See their long term ethnography of the university project: http://www.eotu.uiuc.edu/what/index.htm I think this is an IRB that pretty clearly understands, via experience, ethnographic methods. These guys don't make law for everyone. But I think they are a good model and they are breaking ground in the attempted colocation of human subject protection stuff across disciplines. Some highlights in the application for exemption: *NEW* IRB Application for Exemption: http://www.irb.uiuc.edu/files/ exemptform.dot (this will open as a fillable form in WORD) 4. Research involving the collection or study of existing data, documents, records . . . if these sources are publicly available or if the information is recorded by the investigator in such a maner that subjects cannot be identified, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects. Note: in order to be eligible for this exemption, all data, documents, records, or specimens must exist prior to IRB review and must have been collected for purposes other than the proposed research. (To qualify for an exemption in this category, the proposed research must be strictly retrospective). Later in the boxed summary sections: 5. Please explain how confidentiality will be maintained during and after data collection. If appropriate, address confidentiality of data collected via e-mail, web interfaces, computer servers and other networked information. 7. Individually identifiable information. Will any identifiable information, including images of subjects, be published, shared, or otherwise disseminated? . . . NOTE: if yes, subjects must provide explicit consent or assent for such dissemination . . . Elsewhere, copy of their informed consent requirements: http:// www.irb.uiuc.edu/?q=informed-consent/ElementsOfInformedConsent.html +++ we can, then, quibble a bit over what is or isn't public and you may not be forced to stay within UI's parameters that the data be "historic," But my point is, and has been all along, that working in the field does not exempt one from confidentiality, informed consent, and protection of subjects. One might, for various reasons, get off the hook for SOME of it . . . but when the data used can be traced back to individuals (and MUCH web published data CAN BE). . . I think in most places, using that data without prior informed consent might well be frowned upon by many IRB committees. GAWD I hope this makes it through the list's 10k limit. I'm having a lot of trouble making meaningful points around that limit. Edward Lee Lamoureux, Ph. D.

1 0