Ethical challenges in qualitative research using Facebook
Hi AoIR Community, I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on. I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments. Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups. I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?). Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated. Many thanks in advance, Emily
Hi Emily, My colleague at BCU recently contributed to this report from the University of Aberdeen regarding Ethics and Social Media, which may be useful to you. http://www.dotrural.ac.uk/socialmediaresearchethics.pdf Kind regards Craig On 26 Jul 2016, at 06:06, Emily Wolfinger <emilywolfinger@hotmail.com<mailto:emilywolfinger@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi AoIR Community, I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on. I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments. Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups. I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?). Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated. Many thanks in advance, Emily _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org<mailto:Air-L@listserv.aoir.org> mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Dear Craig, Yes, I have read these guidelines and they have informed my thinking a lot. Thank you, Emily ________________________________ From: Craig Hamilton <Craig.Hamilton@bcu.ac.uk> Sent: Tuesday, 26 July 2016 4:09 PM To: Emily Wolfinger Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Ethical challenges in qualitative research using Facebook Hi Emily, My colleague at BCU recently contributed to this report from the University of Aberdeen regarding Ethics and Social Media, which may be useful to you. http://www.dotrural.ac.uk/socialmediaresearchethics.pdf SoMe Report final - dotrural.ac.uk<http://www.dotrural.ac.uk/socialmediaresearchethics.pdf> www.dotrural.ac.uk 3!! 1.!Introduction, ' 1.1!Background, ' In!recentyears!the!number!of!people!engaging!with!social!mediahas!exploded.!Social!media platforms!are!now!utilised!as ... Kind regards Craig On 26 Jul 2016, at 06:06, Emily Wolfinger <emilywolfinger@hotmail.com<mailto:emilywolfinger@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi AoIR Community, I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on. I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments. Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups. I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?). Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated. Many thanks in advance, Emily _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org<mailto:Air-L@listserv.aoir.org> mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Hi Emily and colleagues, First of all, kudos for your taking such good care at looking into these ethical dimensions of your research. Secondly, a couple of questions: are the posts drawn exclusively from Australian FB users - and if so, what is the Australian law regarding what appears in a public context online? In the U.S., last I knew, such postings are considered automatically copyrighted, and so one ethical-legal issue is, should this be the law in Australia as well, to recognize the posters as copyright holders. Thirdly, the methodological approach and its affiliated ethical challenges as you describe them are, in my somewhat limited experience, rather standard. This means that I've seen similar projects - including ones involving far more sensitive expression - receive IRB and REB approval, so I would not stop with your worst-case scenarios (though these are clearly and carefully thought out - again, kudos). Some possibilities. In terms of dissemination / publication - would it be possible to (a) disguise many, if not the majority of posts by way of a paraphrase and/or aggregate identity (if appropriate), thereby avoiding direct citations, while (b) using some direct citations when absolutely necessary - and then requesting permission to do so? While there are difficulties with requesting such permission, as you point out, in my experience (i.e., reading about and/or discussing similar cases in a variety of contexts - the U.S., the E.U., and Scandinavia), these are not insurmountable. To be sure, one needs to exercise caution regarding identity - though these days, it seems that the vast majority of FB identities are more or less authentic. Ditto in the case of a vulnerable group, beginning with legal minors. But with care, permission can be requested when necessary in ethically sensitive and responsible ways. Of course, there will likely be a few instances of "no, thank you" (or less politely) - but with any luck, having to omit perhaps a handful of choice citations (and relegating them back into more anonymized form if possible / necessary), will not prevent you from having sufficient evidence and analyses to effectively respond to your research questions. That's at least my first take - and I only offer these as first thoughts, knowing that there are real experts on this list, including several colleagues in Australia who will have better information about the Aussie context, as well as our colleagues Elizabeth Buchanan, Michael Zimmer, Annette Markham, and many others in the northern hemisphere with extensive experience in these domains as well who will have much more to add. Hope this helps, then, as at least a helpful start in the discussion. Again, kudos and all best wishes, - charles -- Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication University of Oslo <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> Editor, The Journal of Media Innovations <https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/TJMI/> Postboks 1093 Blindern 0317 Oslo, Norway c.m.ess@media.uio.no On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Emily Wolfinger <emilywolfinger@hotmail.com
wrote:
Hi AoIR Community,
I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on.
I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments.
Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups.
I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?).
Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated.
Many thanks in advance,
Emily _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Dear Charles, Thanks for a most helpful response to my earlier email. Please see my answers and comments below. Best regards, Emily ________________________________ From: Charles Ess <charles.ess@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, 26 July 2016 4:14 PM To: Emily Wolfinger Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Ethical challenges in qualitative research using Facebook Hi Emily and colleagues, First of all, kudos for your taking such good care at looking into these ethical dimensions of your research. Secondly, a couple of questions: are the posts drawn exclusively from Australian FB users - and if so, what is the Australian law regarding what appears in a public context online? In the U.S., last I knew, such postings are considered automatically copyrighted, and so one ethical-legal issue is, should this be the law in Australia as well, to recognize the posters as copyright holders. An important question, thank you. I have read a bit about the Australian legal context, but need to explore this further. Any comments from the Australian Internet research community about this would be great. Thirdly, the methodological approach and its affiliated ethical challenges as you describe them are, in my somewhat limited experience, rather standard. This means that I've seen similar projects - including ones involving far more sensitive expression - receive IRB and REB approval, so I would not stop with your worst-case scenarios (though these are clearly and carefully thought out - again, kudos). This is heartening to hear. Some possibilities. In terms of dissemination / publication - would it be possible to (a) disguise many, if not the majority of posts by way of a paraphrase and/or aggregate identity (if appropriate), thereby avoiding direct citations, while (b) using some direct citations when absolutely necessary - and then requesting permission to do so? While there are difficulties with requesting such permission, as you point out, in my experience (i.e., reading about and/or discussing similar cases in a variety of contexts - the U.S., the E.U., and Scandinavia), these are not insurmountable. To be sure, one needs to exercise caution regarding identity - though these days, it seems that the vast majority of FB identities are more or less authentic. Ditto in the case of a vulnerable group, beginning with legal minors. But with care, permission can be requested when necessary in ethically sensitive and responsible ways. Of course, there will likely be a few instances of "no, thank you" (or less politely) - but with any luck, having to omit perhaps a handful of choice citations (and relegating them back into more anonymized form if possible / necessary), will not prevent you from having sufficient evidence and analyses to effectively respond to your research questions. This is exactly the approach I wanted to take so I would be interested to hear from others about this. My only concern is that some in the social science community (and I imagine beyond) take issue with paraphrasing or fabrication as a strategy for anonymising data . Certainly Annette Markham whom you refer to below wrote about this in a 2012 article. My main concern, however, is around the ethics of my research project so I would feel comfortable with this practice so long as it's widely accepted by the Internet research community. Your arguments re approaching users for consent give me confidence in incorporating this as a strategy in my ethics application. I will certainly explore this further as an option. Re your comment about the vast majority of Facebook identities as being more or less authentic, it would be great if you could point me to some research about this, thanks. That's at least my first take - and I only offer these as first thoughts, knowing that there are real experts on this list, including several colleagues in Australia who will have better information about the Aussie context, as well as our colleagues Elizabeth Buchanan, Michael Zimmer, Annette Markham, and many others in the northern hemisphere with extensive experience in these domains as well who will have much more to add. Hope this helps, then, as at least a helpful start in the discussion. Very helpful, thanks Charles. Again, kudos and all best wishes, - charles -- Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication University of Oslo <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> [http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/charles-ess.jpg]<http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> Charles Melvin Ess - Department of Media and Communication<http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> www.hf.uio.no Pfadenhauer, Michaela; Sugiyama, Satomi & Ess, Charles Melvin (2015). Editorial [introduction]: Special Issue of IJSR on Social Robots: Form, Content, Critique.. Editor, The Journal of Media Innovations <https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/TJMI/> Postboks 1093 Blindern 0317 Oslo, Norway c.m.ess@media.uio.no<mailto:c.m.ess@media.uio.no> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Emily Wolfinger <emilywolfinger@hotmail.com<mailto:emilywolfinger@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi AoIR Community, I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on. I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments. Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups. I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?). Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated. Many thanks in advance, Emily _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org<mailto:Air-L@listserv.aoir.org> mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Hi Emily and Charles, regarding the use of paraphrasing as part of annonymization process vs. concerns about data integrity, it might be worth considering a model where the publication includes gated access to a database with the original quotes. Access to the original data could be granted for paper reviews and editors to verify that the paraphrasing retains the original meaning. After publication, other researchers could also request access to the original data if they can show a reasonable need and a good reputation for maintaining the privacy of research participants. I don't have any prior experience with such a model, but thought it might be worth thinking about/discussing. Best wishes, Ansgar Dr. Ansgar Koene Senior Research Fellow: Horizon Policy Impact, CaSMa & UnBias Horizon Digital Economy Research Institute University of Nottingham http://casma.wp.horizon.ac.uk/ http://unbias.wp.horizon.ac.uk/ http://www.horizon.ac.uk/ https://sites.google.com/site/arkoene/ ________________________________________ From: Air-L [air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Emily Wolfinger [emilywolfinger@hotmail.com] Sent: 26 July 2016 07:59 To: Charles Ess Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Ethical challenges in qualitative research using Facebook Dear Charles, Thanks for a most helpful response to my earlier email. Please see my answers and comments below. Best regards, Emily ________________________________ From: Charles Ess <charles.ess@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, 26 July 2016 4:14 PM To: Emily Wolfinger Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Ethical challenges in qualitative research using Facebook Hi Emily and colleagues, First of all, kudos for your taking such good care at looking into these ethical dimensions of your research. Secondly, a couple of questions: are the posts drawn exclusively from Australian FB users - and if so, what is the Australian law regarding what appears in a public context online? In the U.S., last I knew, such postings are considered automatically copyrighted, and so one ethical-legal issue is, should this be the law in Australia as well, to recognize the posters as copyright holders. An important question, thank you. I have read a bit about the Australian legal context, but need to explore this further. Any comments from the Australian Internet research community about this would be great. Thirdly, the methodological approach and its affiliated ethical challenges as you describe them are, in my somewhat limited experience, rather standard. This means that I've seen similar projects - including ones involving far more sensitive expression - receive IRB and REB approval, so I would not stop with your worst-case scenarios (though these are clearly and carefully thought out - again, kudos). This is heartening to hear. Some possibilities. In terms of dissemination / publication - would it be possible to (a) disguise many, if not the majority of posts by way of a paraphrase and/or aggregate identity (if appropriate), thereby avoiding direct citations, while (b) using some direct citations when absolutely necessary - and then requesting permission to do so? While there are difficulties with requesting such permission, as you point out, in my experience (i.e., reading about and/or discussing similar cases in a variety of contexts - the U.S., the E.U., and Scandinavia), these are not insurmountable. To be sure, one needs to exercise caution regarding identity - though these days, it seems that the vast majority of FB identities are more or less authentic. Ditto in the case of a vulnerable group, beginning with legal minors. But with care, permission can be requested when necessary in ethically sensitive and responsible ways. Of course, there will likely be a few instances of "no, thank you" (or less politely) - but with any luck, having to omit perhaps a handful of choice citations (and relegating them back into more anonymized form if possible / necessary), will not prevent you from having sufficient evidence and analyses to effectively respond to your research questions. This is exactly the approach I wanted to take so I would be interested to hear from others about this. My only concern is that some in the social science community (and I imagine beyond) take issue with paraphrasing or fabrication as a strategy for anonymising data . Certainly Annette Markham whom you refer to below wrote about this in a 2012 article. My main concern, however, is around the ethics of my research project so I would feel comfortable with this practice so long as it's widely accepted by the Internet research community. Your arguments re approaching users for consent give me confidence in incorporating this as a strategy in my ethics application. I will certainly explore this further as an option. Re your comment about the vast majority of Facebook identities as being more or less authentic, it would be great if you could point me to some research about this, thanks. That's at least my first take - and I only offer these as first thoughts, knowing that there are real experts on this list, including several colleagues in Australia who will have better information about the Aussie context, as well as our colleagues Elizabeth Buchanan, Michael Zimmer, Annette Markham, and many others in the northern hemisphere with extensive experience in these domains as well who will have much more to add. Hope this helps, then, as at least a helpful start in the discussion. Very helpful, thanks Charles. Again, kudos and all best wishes, - charles -- Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication University of Oslo <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> [http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/charles-ess.jpg]<http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> Charles Melvin Ess - Department of Media and Communication<http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> www.hf.uio.no Pfadenhauer, Michaela; Sugiyama, Satomi & Ess, Charles Melvin (2015). Editorial [introduction]: Special Issue of IJSR on Social Robots: Form, Content, Critique.. Editor, The Journal of Media Innovations <https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/TJMI/> Postboks 1093 Blindern 0317 Oslo, Norway c.m.ess@media.uio.no<mailto:c.m.ess@media.uio.no> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Emily Wolfinger <emilywolfinger@hotmail.com<mailto:emilywolfinger@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi AoIR Community, I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on. I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments. Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups. I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?). Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated. Many thanks in advance, Emily _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org<mailto:Air-L@listserv.aoir.org> mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
Dear Ansgar, This is definitely a suggestion worth thinking about. Thanks for getting in touch. I'd be interested in hearing from others about this. Thanks again, Ansgar, Emily ________________________________ From: Ansgar Koene <Ansgar.Koene@nottingham.ac.uk> Sent: Tuesday, 26 July 2016 11:54 PM To: Emily Wolfinger; Charles Ess Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: RE: [Air-L] Ethical challenges in qualitative research using Facebook Hi Emily and Charles, regarding the use of paraphrasing as part of annonymization process vs. concerns about data integrity, it might be worth considering a model where the publication includes gated access to a database with the original quotes. Access to the original data could be granted for paper reviews and editors to verify that the paraphrasing retains the original meaning. After publication, other researchers could also request access to the original data if they can show a reasonable need and a good reputation for maintaining the privacy of research participants. I don't have any prior experience with such a model, but thought it might be worth thinking about/discussing. Best wishes, Ansgar Dr. Ansgar Koene Senior Research Fellow: Horizon Policy Impact, CaSMa & UnBias Horizon Digital Economy Research Institute University of Nottingham http://casma.wp.horizon.ac.uk/ [http://casma.wp.horizon.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/cropped-CaSMa-logo-1890x1299.jpg]<http://casma.wp.horizon.ac.uk/> CaSMa Research | Citizen-centric approaches to Social ...<http://casma.wp.horizon.ac.uk/> casma.wp.horizon.ac.uk A lot of mums lack confidence about technology but not for much longer… This morning Dr Sue Back OBE arrived to Top Valley Academy to deliver the first #techmums ... http://unbias.wp.horizon.ac.uk/ http://www.horizon.ac.uk/ https://sites.google.com/site/arkoene/ ________________________________________ From: Air-L [air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Emily Wolfinger [emilywolfinger@hotmail.com] Sent: 26 July 2016 07:59 To: Charles Ess Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Ethical challenges in qualitative research using Facebook Dear Charles, Thanks for a most helpful response to my earlier email. Please see my answers and comments below. Best regards, Emily ________________________________ From: Charles Ess <charles.ess@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, 26 July 2016 4:14 PM To: Emily Wolfinger Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Ethical challenges in qualitative research using Facebook Hi Emily and colleagues, First of all, kudos for your taking such good care at looking into these ethical dimensions of your research. Secondly, a couple of questions: are the posts drawn exclusively from Australian FB users - and if so, what is the Australian law regarding what appears in a public context online? In the U.S., last I knew, such postings are considered automatically copyrighted, and so one ethical-legal issue is, should this be the law in Australia as well, to recognize the posters as copyright holders. An important question, thank you. I have read a bit about the Australian legal context, but need to explore this further. Any comments from the Australian Internet research community about this would be great. Thirdly, the methodological approach and its affiliated ethical challenges as you describe them are, in my somewhat limited experience, rather standard. This means that I've seen similar projects - including ones involving far more sensitive expression - receive IRB and REB approval, so I would not stop with your worst-case scenarios (though these are clearly and carefully thought out - again, kudos). This is heartening to hear. Some possibilities. In terms of dissemination / publication - would it be possible to (a) disguise many, if not the majority of posts by way of a paraphrase and/or aggregate identity (if appropriate), thereby avoiding direct citations, while (b) using some direct citations when absolutely necessary - and then requesting permission to do so? While there are difficulties with requesting such permission, as you point out, in my experience (i.e., reading about and/or discussing similar cases in a variety of contexts - the U.S., the E.U., and Scandinavia), these are not insurmountable. To be sure, one needs to exercise caution regarding identity - though these days, it seems that the vast majority of FB identities are more or less authentic. Ditto in the case of a vulnerable group, beginning with legal minors. But with care, permission can be requested when necessary in ethically sensitive and responsible ways. Of course, there will likely be a few instances of "no, thank you" (or less politely) - but with any luck, having to omit perhaps a handful of choice citations (and relegating them back into more anonymized form if possible / necessary), will not prevent you from having sufficient evidence and analyses to effectively respond to your research questions. This is exactly the approach I wanted to take so I would be interested to hear from others about this. My only concern is that some in the social science community (and I imagine beyond) take issue with paraphrasing or fabrication as a strategy for anonymising data . Certainly Annette Markham whom you refer to below wrote about this in a 2012 article. My main concern, however, is around the ethics of my research project so I would feel comfortable with this practice so long as it's widely accepted by the Internet research community. Your arguments re approaching users for consent give me confidence in incorporating this as a strategy in my ethics application. I will certainly explore this further as an option. Re your comment about the vast majority of Facebook identities as being more or less authentic, it would be great if you could point me to some research about this, thanks. That's at least my first take - and I only offer these as first thoughts, knowing that there are real experts on this list, including several colleagues in Australia who will have better information about the Aussie context, as well as our colleagues Elizabeth Buchanan, Michael Zimmer, Annette Markham, and many others in the northern hemisphere with extensive experience in these domains as well who will have much more to add. Hope this helps, then, as at least a helpful start in the discussion. Very helpful, thanks Charles. Again, kudos and all best wishes, - charles -- Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication University of Oslo <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> [http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/charles-ess.jpg]<http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> Charles Melvin Ess - Department of Media and Communication<http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html> www.hf.uio.no<http://www.hf.uio.no> Pfadenhauer, Michaela; Sugiyama, Satomi & Ess, Charles Melvin (2015). Editorial [introduction]: Special Issue of IJSR on Social Robots: Form, Content, Critique.. Editor, The Journal of Media Innovations <https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/TJMI/> Postboks 1093 Blindern 0317 Oslo, Norway c.m.ess@media.uio.no<mailto:c.m.ess@media.uio.no> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Emily Wolfinger <emilywolfinger@hotmail.com<mailto:emilywolfinger@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi AoIR Community, I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on. I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments. Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups. I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?). Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated. Many thanks in advance, Emily _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org<mailto:Air-L@listserv.aoir.org> mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
Hi Charles -- In any Berne or TRIPs signatory country, copyright will arise automatically when the text is written. So, yes in most countries, certainly Australia. Whether that matters, (for example, whether Australian fair dealing might allow the posts to be used or quoted for research purposes regardless) is a whole other question that I can't answer off the cuff. Cheers, DLB On 2016-07-25 23:14, Charles Ess wrote:
Hi Emily and colleagues,
First of all, kudos for your taking such good care at looking into these ethical dimensions of your research.
Secondly, a couple of questions: are the posts drawn exclusively from Australian FB users - and if so, what is the Australian law regarding what appears in a public context online? In the U.S., last I knew, such postings are considered automatically copyrighted, and so one ethical-legal issue is, should this be the law in Australia as well, to recognize the posters as copyright holders.
Thirdly, the methodological approach and its affiliated ethical challenges as you describe them are, in my somewhat limited experience, rather standard. This means that I've seen similar projects - including ones involving far more sensitive expression - receive IRB and REB approval, so I would not stop with your worst-case scenarios (though these are clearly and carefully thought out - again, kudos).
Some possibilities. In terms of dissemination / publication - would it be possible to (a) disguise many, if not the majority of posts by way of a paraphrase and/or aggregate identity (if appropriate), thereby avoiding direct citations, while (b) using some direct citations when absolutely necessary - and then requesting permission to do so? While there are difficulties with requesting such permission, as you point out, in my experience (i.e., reading about and/or discussing similar cases in a variety of contexts - the U.S., the E.U., and Scandinavia), these are not insurmountable. To be sure, one needs to exercise caution regarding identity - though these days, it seems that the vast majority of FB identities are more or less authentic. Ditto in the case of a vulnerable group, beginning with legal minors. But with care, permission can be requested when necessary in ethically sensitive and responsible ways. Of course, there will likely be a few instances of "no, thank you" (or less politely) - but with any luck, having to omit perhaps a handful of choice citations (and relegating them back into more anonymized form if possible / necessary), will not prevent you from having sufficient evidence and analyses to effectively respond to your research questions.
That's at least my first take - and I only offer these as first thoughts, knowing that there are real experts on this list, including several colleagues in Australia who will have better information about the Aussie context, as well as our colleagues Elizabeth Buchanan, Michael Zimmer, Annette Markham, and many others in the northern hemisphere with extensive experience in these domains as well who will have much more to add.
Hope this helps, then, as at least a helpful start in the discussion.
Again, kudos and all best wishes, - charles -- Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication University of Oslo <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html [4]>
Editor, The Journal of Media Innovations <https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/TJMI/ [5]>
Postboks 1093 Blindern 0317 Oslo, Norway c.m.ess@media.uio.no
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Emily Wolfinger <emilywolfinger@hotmail.com
wrote:
Hi AoIR Community, I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on. I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments. Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect ! the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups. I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?). Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated. Many thanks in advance, Emily _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org [1] Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org [2] Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ [3]
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org [1] Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org [2]
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ [3]
-- School of Law University of California, Irvine 4500 Berkeley Place Irvine, CA 92697-8000 Voice: (949) 824-9325 Fax: (949)824-7336 bits: dburk@uci.edu Links: ------ [1] http://aoir.org [2] http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org [3] http://www.aoir.org/ [4] http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html [5] https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/TJMI/
Dear Emily, While it is a little basic for PhD-level research, Chapter 4 in the book "Researching Language and Social Media" (by Ruth Page, David Barton, myself and Michele Zappavigna) summarises the various ethical issues involved from a linguist's perspective and may include some useful references. You may also be interested in an ongoing (but very intermittent) research project I have been running on Facebook which solves the issue of consent by inviting participants to contribute to a Facebook group set up expressly for the research project. This is reported in Majid KhosraviNik's & my chapter in the latest (3rd) edition of "Methods of Critical Discourse Studies". Best of luck with your project - it's really not an easy set of issues to resolve, and as others have commented it is good to see it being taken much more seriously than is often the case. Johnny. Dr J W Unger Lecturer and Academic Director of Summer Programmes Department of Linguistics and English Language Lancaster University LA1 4YL e-mail: j.unger@lancaster.ac.uk<mailto:j.unger@lancaster.ac.uk> tel: +44 1524 592591<tel:+44%201524%20592591> Follow me on Twitter @johnnyunger<http://twitter.com/#!/johnnyunger> On 26 Jul 2016, at 07:06, Emily Wolfinger <emilywolfinger@hotmail.com<mailto:emilywolfinger@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi AoIR Community, I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on. I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments. Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups. I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?). Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated. Many thanks in advance, Emily _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org<mailto:Air-L@listserv.aoir.org> mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Hi Emily, The following book, by my Australian colleagues and I, has quite a bit of discussion on the type of ethical issues you face Waller, V., Farquharson, K., and Dempsey, D. (2016) Qualitative Social Research: Contemporary Methods for the Digital Age, London, Sage. Hope this helps Viv -----Original Message----- From: Emily Wolfinger [mailto:emilywolfinger@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, 26 July 2016 3:06 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: [Air-L] Ethical challenges in qualitative research using Facebook Hi AoIR Community, I am a PhD Candidate and I have run into some ethical issues in my research, which I am looking for some guidance on. I am exploring Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia, focusing on a period of welfare debate in which sole parent pension amendments were introduced (May 2012-January 2013). I'm undertaking a discourse analysis of a subset of comments across four categories of public pages and groups- media, political parties and ministers, welfare/charity organisations and sole mother networks- that were published in response to the amendments. Although Facebook Data Policy considers this information public, Internet research ethics guidelines and other academic papers point to a number of ethical issues around publishing the comments of users without obtaining their consent. As I am doing a post-structural discourse analysis this is unavoidable unless I consider paraphrasing or similar techniques that aim to protect the identity of users, however this strategy raises questions of scientific rigor and does not seem to be one that is widely used or indeed fool proof. There are also issues around contacting users for consent, for example users could be underage or belong to other vulnerable groups. I am left with two options if I take a worst case scenario approach to these dilemmas - either tweak my research question (for example to look at the posts of public figures and organisations such as media outlets) or consider alternative research methods which do not present the ethical challenges of discourse analysis or other methods of close analysis, but allow me to answer my research question (What were the Facebook user perceptions of sole mother poverty and welfare in Australia between May 2012 and January 2013?). Any suggestions for readings, tips or advice regarding ways forward including methods would be most appreciated. Many thanks in advance, Emily
participants (7)
-
Ansgar Koene -
Charles Ess -
Craig Hamilton -
Dan L. Burk -
Emily Wolfinger -
Unger, Johann -
Vivienne Waller