“黄金法则”有什么问题?网络空间伦理研究的难题

Inf. Soc. Pub Date : 1996-06-01 DOI:10.1080/713856146
Christina Allen
{"title":"“黄金法则”有什么问题?网络空间伦理研究的难题","authors":"Christina Allen","doi":"10.1080/713856146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Three key values for ethical cyberspace research practices are evident in recent discussions: (1) protect the subjects from harm as a result of the research fieldwork and the research practices; (2) produce good social science research; and (3) do not unnecessarily perturb the phenomena studied. Much of the argumentation aims to negotiate the ethical conflicts that often emerge between these goals. Bakhtin argues that one can only strive for a bottom-up ethical wisdom built upon concrete examples, and disputes the possibility that rigid top-down application of universal rules constitutes ethical action. His perspective has key implications for ethical research practices. I illustrate this perspective at work through my recent fieldwork and writing practices in a virtual community. Research ethics for cyberspace are like research ethics for any other site. They should be situated, dialogic agreements that develop over time between researchers and the participants of the research study. It is unlikely that ...","PeriodicalId":259468,"journal":{"name":"Inf. Soc.","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"84","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What's Wrong with the 'Golden Rule'? Conundrums of Conducting Ethical Research in Cyberspace\",\"authors\":\"Christina Allen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/713856146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Three key values for ethical cyberspace research practices are evident in recent discussions: (1) protect the subjects from harm as a result of the research fieldwork and the research practices; (2) produce good social science research; and (3) do not unnecessarily perturb the phenomena studied. Much of the argumentation aims to negotiate the ethical conflicts that often emerge between these goals. Bakhtin argues that one can only strive for a bottom-up ethical wisdom built upon concrete examples, and disputes the possibility that rigid top-down application of universal rules constitutes ethical action. His perspective has key implications for ethical research practices. I illustrate this perspective at work through my recent fieldwork and writing practices in a virtual community. Research ethics for cyberspace are like research ethics for any other site. They should be situated, dialogic agreements that develop over time between researchers and the participants of the research study. It is unlikely that ...\",\"PeriodicalId\":259468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Inf. Soc.\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1996-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"84\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Inf. Soc.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/713856146\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inf. Soc.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/713856146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 84

摘要

在最近的讨论中,网络空间伦理研究实践的三个关键价值是显而易见的:(1)保护受试者免受研究实地工作和研究实践的伤害;(2)开展良好的社会科学研究;(3)不要不必要地干扰所研究的现象。许多争论的目的在于协商这些目标之间经常出现的道德冲突。巴赫金认为,人们只能争取建立在具体例子之上的自下而上的伦理智慧,并对自上而下严格应用普遍规则构成伦理行为的可能性提出质疑。他的观点对伦理研究实践具有重要意义。我通过我最近在一个虚拟社区的实地考察和写作实践来阐明这一观点。网络空间的研究伦理就像其他任何网站的研究伦理一样。它们应该是在研究人员和研究的参与者之间随着时间的推移而形成的定位的、对话的协议。不太可能……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What's Wrong with the 'Golden Rule'? Conundrums of Conducting Ethical Research in Cyberspace
Three key values for ethical cyberspace research practices are evident in recent discussions: (1) protect the subjects from harm as a result of the research fieldwork and the research practices; (2) produce good social science research; and (3) do not unnecessarily perturb the phenomena studied. Much of the argumentation aims to negotiate the ethical conflicts that often emerge between these goals. Bakhtin argues that one can only strive for a bottom-up ethical wisdom built upon concrete examples, and disputes the possibility that rigid top-down application of universal rules constitutes ethical action. His perspective has key implications for ethical research practices. I illustrate this perspective at work through my recent fieldwork and writing practices in a virtual community. Research ethics for cyberspace are like research ethics for any other site. They should be situated, dialogic agreements that develop over time between researchers and the participants of the research study. It is unlikely that ...
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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