[Air-L] Public/ Private

[Asa Rosenberg]

I'd like to ask then a sort of meta question here.
I am working with internet research ethics, particularly with regards to 3D
virtual environments (SL) but also about how/if ethics may differ depending
on application and other contextual factors.
If I wanted to analyze this discussion on research ethics that has been
going on on this list,
what would you suggest would be the right way to approach the issue of
consent?

While this list is publicly archived (at
http://listserv.aoir.org/pipermail/air-l-aoir.org/)
some people here have explicitly claimed that might not be a sufficient
requirement to use data without consent.

This ties in to a problem I have pondered already before. If you disagree
with your research participants wether not getting consent or not would be
harmful, is it your word or theirs that count? (An odd, but authentic
example: You research publicly posted material, political blogs for example,
and encounter a blog that has a post that says they hate researchers who
dont get consent).

It seems that when we say that "the ground rule is that if you post it on
the web its public" we mean that as a truth that disqualifies the
expectations and wishes of some people. Do we follow the participants wishes
against what we think is better knowledge or do we own up to the fact that
research sometimes involves dominance?

-asa


-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Fran: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org
[mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org]For Charlie Balch
Skickat: den 13 augusti 2007 20:11
Till: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
Amne: Re: [Air-L] Public/ Private


It should be noted that the act of deleting internet content does not remove
its availability. Sites like http://archive.org claim to record the entire
internet history and provide free access and comparisons of content changes.

I've occasionally explored the evolution of content using archive.org (I've
no association other than an occasional user). My interest has mostly been
how business and government sites change but the possibility of looking at
revisionist blogs is a fascinating research opportunity.

I've also written software that allows me to "scrape" or aggregate public
information when the owners would not or could not provide the database for
analysis. I've not published the information collected from my scrapes for a
variety of reasons. Mostly because I'm lazy and the value of self-selected
responses to surveys are very questionable.

Then again, I suspect I could find "serious flaws" in almost *any* research
design. I continue to be amazed that research provides useful results
despite how easy it is to find errors in the research process.

As a bottom line, if you post it on the net, it is public. The publisher
might regret their post but that does not make it private. Yes, additional
exposure might bring some greater harm to the poster but the poster has
brought it upon themselves.

IRBs should focus on research where an *intervention* might cause the
participant harm.

Charlie Balch Me.D, MBA, Ph.D yada yada
professor of Computer Information Systems
Arizona Western College
http://charlie.balch.org



_______________________________________________
The Air-L at 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/