应用语言学中的网络研究伦理:对数据收集和报告实践的系统回顾

Matt Kessler, Francesca Marino, Dacota Liska
{"title":"应用语言学中的网络研究伦理:对数据收集和报告实践的系统回顾","authors":"Matt Kessler,&nbsp;Francesca Marino,&nbsp;Dacota Liska","doi":"10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Ethnography – a methodological staple of applied linguistics research since the field's inception – has well-established ethical guidelines. Although ethnographic research has traditionally been subject to institutional ethics review board protocols, the expansion of ethnography into online spaces, which has been recharacterized as <em>netnography,</em> has presented novel ethical challenges (e.g., determining what constitutes ‘public’ versus ‘private’ data, protecting participants’ identities, and more). To better understand how researchers have handled such ethical challenges, this study systematically reviews the data collection and reporting practices of peer-reviewed netnographic research in applied linguistics. High-impact journals were searched using specific criteria, resulting in 60 studies published in 14 journals during the span of 2000–2022. These studies were coded to examine how common issues were handled, such as: gaining informed consent, obtaining permissions (from companies and their representatives to use data), and protecting participants’ identities. Data analyses revealed that, while such ethical issues are a consideration for many researchers, there is still ample room for improvement when it comes to ethical decision-making. Based on our review, in the discussion, we provide suggestions for those who intend to conduct netnographic research in the future.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101075,"journal":{"name":"Research Methods in Applied Linguistics","volume":"2 3","pages":"Article 100082"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Netnographic research ethics in applied linguistics: A systematic review of data collection and reporting practices\",\"authors\":\"Matt Kessler,&nbsp;Francesca Marino,&nbsp;Dacota Liska\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100082\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Ethnography – a methodological staple of applied linguistics research since the field's inception – has well-established ethical guidelines. Although ethnographic research has traditionally been subject to institutional ethics review board protocols, the expansion of ethnography into online spaces, which has been recharacterized as <em>netnography,</em> has presented novel ethical challenges (e.g., determining what constitutes ‘public’ versus ‘private’ data, protecting participants’ identities, and more). To better understand how researchers have handled such ethical challenges, this study systematically reviews the data collection and reporting practices of peer-reviewed netnographic research in applied linguistics. High-impact journals were searched using specific criteria, resulting in 60 studies published in 14 journals during the span of 2000–2022. These studies were coded to examine how common issues were handled, such as: gaining informed consent, obtaining permissions (from companies and their representatives to use data), and protecting participants’ identities. Data analyses revealed that, while such ethical issues are a consideration for many researchers, there is still ample room for improvement when it comes to ethical decision-making. Based on our review, in the discussion, we provide suggestions for those who intend to conduct netnographic research in the future.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101075,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research Methods in Applied Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"2 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 100082\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research Methods in Applied Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772766123000423\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Methods in Applied Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772766123000423","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

民族志是应用语言学研究的一个主要方法论领域,自该领域成立以来,已有完善的伦理准则。尽管民族志研究传统上受到机构伦理审查委员会的约束,但将民族志扩展到网络空间(被重新定性为网络志)带来了新的伦理挑战(例如,确定什么是“公共”数据与“私人”数据,保护参与者的身份等)。为了更好地了解研究人员是如何应对这些伦理挑战的,本研究系统地回顾了应用语言学中同行评审的网络研究的数据收集和报告实践。使用特定标准搜索高影响力期刊,在2000-2002年期间,在14种期刊上发表了60项研究。对这些研究进行编码,以检查如何处理常见问题,例如:获得知情同意、获得(公司及其代表使用数据的)许可以及保护参与者的身份。数据分析显示,尽管许多研究人员都在考虑这些伦理问题,但在伦理决策方面仍有很大的改进空间。基于我们的综述,在讨论中,我们为那些打算在未来进行网络地图研究的人提供了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Netnographic research ethics in applied linguistics: A systematic review of data collection and reporting practices

Ethnography – a methodological staple of applied linguistics research since the field's inception – has well-established ethical guidelines. Although ethnographic research has traditionally been subject to institutional ethics review board protocols, the expansion of ethnography into online spaces, which has been recharacterized as netnography, has presented novel ethical challenges (e.g., determining what constitutes ‘public’ versus ‘private’ data, protecting participants’ identities, and more). To better understand how researchers have handled such ethical challenges, this study systematically reviews the data collection and reporting practices of peer-reviewed netnographic research in applied linguistics. High-impact journals were searched using specific criteria, resulting in 60 studies published in 14 journals during the span of 2000–2022. These studies were coded to examine how common issues were handled, such as: gaining informed consent, obtaining permissions (from companies and their representatives to use data), and protecting participants’ identities. Data analyses revealed that, while such ethical issues are a consideration for many researchers, there is still ample room for improvement when it comes to ethical decision-making. Based on our review, in the discussion, we provide suggestions for those who intend to conduct netnographic research in the future.

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
CiteScore
4.10
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信