Just Because the Data Is There, It Doesn’t Mean It’s Yours to Take

K. McCandless
{"title":"Just Because the Data Is There, It Doesn’t Mean It’s Yours to Take","authors":"K. McCandless","doi":"10.5206/elip.v4i1.13554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In research conducted using Twitter data, informed consent has taken the back seat. This literature review examines the perspectives of users, researchers and research ethics boards to provide nuance and context to the issue. Users are generally unaware that their data can be taken for research purposes and that they have agreed to be studied within the platform’s terms of service. This is concerning for both researchers and users alike, as it continues to blur the line of public and private information. Users want to be informed when they are being studied. When informed consent is not obtained, researchers are not respecting the data and the humans who created it. If researchers were required to obtain informed consent when engaging with Twitter data, the resulting research would be more ethical and protect everyone involved: the researcher, the user, and the university.","PeriodicalId":276592,"journal":{"name":"Emerging Library & Information Perspectives","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emerging Library & Information Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5206/elip.v4i1.13554","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In research conducted using Twitter data, informed consent has taken the back seat. This literature review examines the perspectives of users, researchers and research ethics boards to provide nuance and context to the issue. Users are generally unaware that their data can be taken for research purposes and that they have agreed to be studied within the platform’s terms of service. This is concerning for both researchers and users alike, as it continues to blur the line of public and private information. Users want to be informed when they are being studied. When informed consent is not obtained, researchers are not respecting the data and the humans who created it. If researchers were required to obtain informed consent when engaging with Twitter data, the resulting research would be more ethical and protect everyone involved: the researcher, the user, and the university.
仅仅因为数据在那里,并不意味着你可以拿走它
在使用Twitter数据进行的研究中,知情同意已经退居次要地位。本文献综述考察了用户、研究人员和研究伦理委员会的观点,以提供问题的细微差别和背景。用户通常不知道他们的数据可能被用于研究目的,也不知道他们已经同意在平台的服务条款内被研究。这让研究人员和用户都感到担忧,因为它继续模糊公共和私人信息的界限。用户希望在他们被研究时得到通知。如果没有获得知情同意,研究人员就不尊重数据和创造数据的人。如果研究人员在使用Twitter数据时被要求获得知情同意,那么由此产生的研究将更加合乎道德,并保护所有相关人员:研究人员、用户和大学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信