Ethical challenges in digital research 2 edition ETHICAL ... · second version of Ethical Challenges in Digital Research, we have revisited the category and added even more relevant

Ethical challenges in digital research 2nd edition

A guide to discuss ethical issues in digital research

Second edition

ETHICAL CHALLENGES IN DIGITAL RESEARCH


i

Ethical challenges in digital research – A guide to discuss ethical issues in digital research Second edition January 2020 Developed by DIGETIK at Aalborg University as part of DIGHUMLAB

Authors

Line Lisberg Christensen, Research Assistant Malene Charlotte Larsen, Associate Professor Layout

Steffen Madsen, DIGHUMLAB


ii

I. Introduction to document The ever-changing development of digital technologies and digital infrastructure makes it necessary for us as researchers to change approaches to digital research within the humanities. In terms of research ethics, we can no longer use traditional laws and guidelines that only match the non-digital world. In a time where it is necessary to change and re-think our ways of doing research, we bring to you this second version of Ethical Challenges in Digital Research to initiate discussions about ethical research and to help guide you in your digital research. The compound may serve you as a guideline to ethical research, a helpful tool to those in need of inspiration or merely as a list of literature that is relevant to your field, whether that is: big data, surveillance, privacy, games and gamification, ethics in studies with children and adolescents, health research, journalism, ethnographic studies, visual methods, vulnerable groups, web archives, economy, risky business for researchers or one of the many other categories in this collection of ethical digital research.

We initially created this document with the intention of helping scholars reflect and discuss the ethical dimensions of their digital research, whilst providing guidance and insight about how to deal with these issues. We have compiled a list of articles, papers, books, book chapters, guidelines and journals, which we believe can aid researchers and students alike. In this second version, we have added more than 100 new literature results that have been spread across the categories. In addition, we have developed new categories that we believe are reflections of relevant and current fields in the academic world: Economy, Games/Gamification and Criminal/forensic case studies.

We have attempted to remain respectful and vigilant of the intention of each piece of literature, and great effort has been made to understand the intention and direction of the individual researchers. We gladly accept additional literature and proposals and we hope that our extensive work will provide you with ideas, insight and guidance to discuss ethical issues in digital research. Since developing this document, we have also decided to create a search-engine for your convenience. This you can find on DIGHUMLAB’s website, under the tab Learning Resources, or by clicking here.

https://dighumlab.org/ethical-challenges/


iii

II. Relevant academic journals and scholars

We have also chosen to provide the readers of this document with a list of journals of relevance when searching for literature within the field of digital ethics. We especially wish to emphasize the newest addition to the Association of Internet Researcher (AoIR) website, namely their Ethical Guidelines 3.0, which you can access here.

Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR). Ethics and Information Technology. First Monday. Research Ethics Review. Information Ethics. Information, Communication & Ethics in Society. International Journal of Internet Research Ethics.

In addition, we believe that the following authors can be considered central researchers within the field of digital ethics:

Amanda Lagerkvist Anja Bechmann Annette Markham Charles Ess Christian Fuchs Elaine Doyle Elizabeth A. Buchanan Helen Nissenbaum Joseph Migga Kizza Katharina E. Kinder-Kurlanda Katrin Weller Michael Zimmer Pål Aarsand Stine Lomborg

Naturally, other journals may also be relevant, whilst other researchers and authors are relevant as well. These lists only represent a small number of interesting and inspiring authors, researchers and journals.

https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf

https://aoir.org/

https://www.springer.com/journal/10676

https://firstmonday.org/

https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/journal/research-ethics

https://mcfarlandbooks.com/customers/how-to-buy-journals/journal-of-information-ethics/

https://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/jices.htm

https://www.globethics.net/home

https://research.ims.su.se/en/profiles/13-amanda-lagerkvist

https://pure.au.dk/portal/da/persons/anja-bechmann(b093426c-3157-465e-bd29-fe73ee20d446)/publications.html

https://annettemarkham.com/research/

https://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html

http://fuchs.uti.at/papers/

https://www.ul.ie/business/kbs-staff/dr-elaine-doyle

https://www.uwstout.edu/directory/buchanane

https://nissenbaum.tech.cornell.edu/main_cv.html#pub

https://www.utc.edu/faculty/joseph-kizza/index.php

https://www.gesis.org/institut/mitarbeiterverzeichnis/person/katharina.kinder-kurlanda

https://katrinweller.net/publications/

https://www.michaelzimmer.org/category/academic/publications/

https://www.ntnu.edu/employees/pal.aarsand

https://komm.ku.dk/ansatte/?pure=da/persons/293359


iv

Content

1. What is “digital ethics”? ...................................................................................................................................2

2. Big data ..................................................................................................................................................................7

3. Case studies ...................................................................................................................................................... 13

4. Challenges ......................................................................................................................................................... 32

5. Criminal/forensic case studies ................................................................................................................. 51

6. Consent ............................................................................................................................................................... 54

7. Economy ............................................................................................................................................................. 64

8. Educational studies ....................................................................................................................................... 66

9. Ethics in Journalism ...................................................................................................................................... 69

10. Ethics in politics and legislation ............................................................................................................ 74

11. Ethics in relation to businesses and companies ............................................................................ 77

12. Ethics in relation to children and adolescents ................................................................................ 80

13. Ethics in social relations ........................................................................................................................... 88

14. Ethnographic studies ................................................................................................................................. 99

15. Fabrication .................................................................................................................................................. 106

16. Games/Gamification ............................................................................................................................... 109

17. Guidelines .................................................................................................................................................... 112

18. Health research ......................................................................................................................................... 122

19. Mixed, nice stuff ........................................................................................................................................ 125

20. Original, innovative and changing of methods ............................................................................ 131

21. Participatory methods ........................................................................................................................... 140

22. Privacy ........................................................................................................................................................... 147

23. Risky business for researchers........................................................................................................... 158

24. Software and algorithms ....................................................................................................................... 162

25. Surveillance ................................................................................................................................................. 166

26. Third-party tracking ................................................................................................................................ 170

27. Visual methods .......................................................................................................................................... 172

28. Vulnerable groups .................................................................................................................................... 182

29. Web archives .............................................................................................................................................. 190


v

WHAT IS “DIGITAL ETHICS”?


2

1. What is “digital ethics”? Digital ethics has become a field of its own. When dealing with digital data we often find ourselves dealing with ethics from a distance: our connection with participants/subjects is often none-existent, because the participants are on the other side of the computer. To act “ethically” will become inherently more challenging, because we need to rethink how to treat our participants when they are no longer in front of us. In the development of this second version of Ethical Challenges in Digital Research, we have revisited the category and added even more relevant literature in which digital ethics is practiced or researched. While literature from authors such as Charles Ess (2014), Annette Markham (2015) and Christian Fuchs (2017) still reside in the category, we also welcome Eoghan Casey (2018) and Jeffrey T. Hancock (2019) to the category “What is Digital Ethics?” Alderson P. (2004). Ethics. In Fraser, A., Lewis, V., Ding, S., Kellett, M. & Robinson, C. (Eds.) (2004). Doing Research with Children and Young People, pp.97–111. London: Sage Publications. Allen, C. (1996). What’s Wrong with the “Golden Rule”? Conundrums of Conducting Ethical Research in Cyberspace. The Information Society 12 (2), pp.175-188. Association of Internet Research (2012). Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research. Accessed: 06-09-2018. Boehlefeld, S. P. (2011). Doing the Right Thing: Ethical Cyberspace Research. The Information Society 12(2), pp.141-152. Buchanan, E.A. & Zimmer, M. (2013). Internet research ethics. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.) (2013). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Casey, E., Geradts, Z. & Nikkel, B. (2018). Transdisciplinary strategies for digital investigation challenges. Digital Investigation, 25 (pp.1-4), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Chari, T. (2017). Ethical pitfalls in the digital age: when the desire to “serve hot” gets in the way of verification. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.25-43. Information Science Reference (ISR). Clark, K., Duckham, M., Guillemin, M., Hunter, A., McVernon, J., O’Keefe, C., Pitkin, C., Prawer, S., Sinnott, R., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2018). Advancing the ethical use of digital data in human research: challenges and strategies to promote ethical practice. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(1) (pp.59-73), Springer Science and Business Media LLC. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Doyle, E. (2017). Embracing qualitative research: a visual model for nuanced research ethics oversight. Qualitative research, 17(1), pp.95-117. Accessed: 28-09-2018.

http://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-internet-research/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1742287618302299?via%3Dihub


https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10676-018-9490-4


http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1468794116661230



3

Dreyfus, H. (2001). On the Internet. New York: Routledge. Ess, C. (2014). Central issues in the ethics of Digital Media. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics (2), pp.1-34. Malden, Massachusetts: Polity. Franzke, A. S., Bechmann, A., Zimmer, M., Ess, C. & the Association of Internet Researchers (2020). Internet Research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0. Accessed: 02-12-2019. Fuchs, C. (2017). From digital positivism and administrative big data analytics towards critical digital and social media research! European journal of communication, 32(1), pp.37-49. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice. New York: Peter Lang. Hancock, J. T. (2019). The Ethics of Digital Research. In Welles, B. F. & González-Bailón, S. (Eds.) (2019). The Oxford Handbook of Networked Communication. London: Oxford University Press. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Hongladarom, S. (2017). Internet research ethics in a non-western context. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.151-163. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Hoser, B. & Nitschke, T. (2010). Questions on ethics for research in the virtually connected world. Social Networks, 32, pp.180–186. Jasanoff, S. (2016). The ethics of invention: technology and the human future. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Johnson, D. G. (2001). Computer Ethics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer Crimes. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.239-262. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Introduction to social and ethical computing. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.1-18. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Morality and the law. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.19-36. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). New frontiers for computer ethics artificial intelligence, cyberspace, and virtual intelligence. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.263-281. London: Springer. Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge.

https://cryptome.org/2013/01/aaron-swartz/On-the-Internet.pdf


http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0267323116682804


https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190460518.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780190460518-e-25

http://michaelzimmer.org/files/Internet_Research_Ethics_for_the_Social_Age.pdf


4

Mann, C. & Stewart, F. (2000). Internet communication and qualitative research – a handbook for researching online. SAGE publications. Markham, A. N. (2006). Ethic as Method, Method as Ethic: A Case for Reflexivity in Qualitative ICT Research. Information ethics. Markham, A. (2015). Produsing Ethics [for the digital near future]. In Lind, R. (Ed.) (2015). Produsing Theory in a Digital World 2.0: The Intersection of Audiences and Production in Contemporary Theory (2), pp.247-366. Digital Formations, (99). Peter Lang. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2015). Internet research: ethical concerns. In Wright, J. (Ed.) (2015). International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (2), pp.606-613. Elsevier Science. Miko-Schefzig, K. & Reiter, C. (2018). Participatory Organization Research in the Context of the Police: Ethical Research with Vulnerable Groups Using the Example of Detention Centers. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018. McKee, H. A. & Porter, J. E. (2009). The ethics of Internet research: a rhetorical, case-based process. New York: Peter Lang. Pentzold, C. (2017). 'What are these researchers doing in my wikipedia?': Ethical premises and practical judgment in internet-based ethnography. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(2), pp.143-155. Shilton, K. & Sayles, S. (2016). "We Aren't All Going to Be on the Same Page about Ethics": Ethical Practices and Challenges in Research on Digital and Social Media. 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 2016-March, pp.1909-1918. Accessed: 28-6-2018. Tiidenberg, K. (2017). Ethics in Digital Research. In Flick, U. (Ed.) (2017). SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection. SAGE Publications. Tiidenberg, K. (2018). Research ethics, vulnerability, and trust on the internet. In Hunsinger, J., Klastrup, L. & Allen, M. (Eds.) (2018). Second international handbook of internet research, pp.1-15. Dordrecht. Springer. Van den Hoonaard, W. C. (2018). Autobiographical notes from inside the ethics regime: some thoughts on how researchers in the social sciences can own ethics. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018. Whiteman, N. (2012). Undoing ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York: Springer. Yanow, D. & Schwart-Shea, P. (2018). Framing "Deception" and "Covertness" in Research: Do Milgram, Humphreys, and Zimbardo Justify Regulating Social Science Research Ethics? Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018.

http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/3024



https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/hicss/2016/5670/00/5670b909.pdf

https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/hicss/2016/5670/00/5670b909.pdf






5

Zook, M., S. Barocas, D., Boyd, K. Crawford, E. Keller, S. P. Gangadharan, A. Goodman, et al. (2017). Ten simple rules for responsible big data research. PLoS Computational Biology 13 (3). Accessed: 28-09-2018.

https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005399&type=printable


6

BIG DATA


7

2. Big data The stream of data available online indeed qualifies as “BIG”: social media alone can provide us with countless amounts of both qualitative and quantitative data of movement, likes, shares, comments, posts and much more. Authors such as Michael Zimmer (2018), Annette Markham (2017), Dirk Helbing (2018), Christian Fuchs (2017), Katrin Weller (2015) and many other researchers have researched what it means to collect and process Big Data from online platforms and digital technologies. Bancroft, A., Karels, M., Murray, Ó. M. & Zimpfer, J. (2014). Not being there: research at a distance with video, text and speech. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.137-154. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Barocas, S. & Nissenbaum, H. (2014). Big data's end run around procedural privacy protections. Communications of the ACM, 57(11), pp.31-33. Bechmann, A. & Vahlstrup, P.B. (2015). Studying Facebook and Instagram data: The digital footprints software. First Monday, 20(12), 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Boyd, D. & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data information. Communication & society, 15(5), pp.662-679. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Brooker, P., Barnett, J. Cribbin, T. & Sharma, S. (2016). Have we even solved the first ‘big data challenge’? Practical issues concerning data collection and visual representation for social media analytics. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.34-50. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Buchanan, E.A. & Zimmer, M. (2013). Internet research ethics. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.) (2013). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Burkell, J. A. (2016). Remembering me: Big data, individual identity, and the psychological necessity of forgetting. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(1). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Clarke, R. & Taylor, K. (2018). Towards responsible data analytics: a process approach. 31st BLED econference: digital transformation: meeting the challenges, june 17-20, 2018, Bled, Slovenia, conference proceedings. Pucihar, A., Kljajić Borštnar. M., Ravesteijn, P., Seitz, J. & Bons, R. Collmann, J. & Matei, S. A. (Eds.) (2016). Ethical Reasoning in Big Data - An Exploratory Analysis. Springer. Condie, J., Lean, G. & Wilcockson, B. (2017). The Trouble with Tinder: The Ethical Complexities of Researching Location-Aware Social Discovery Apps. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.135-158. Fairfield, J. & Shtein, H. (2014). Big Data, Big Problems: Emerging Issues in the Ethics of Data Science and Journalism. Journal of mass media ethics, 29(1), pp.38-51.

http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/5968/5166


https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878


https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=fimspub



8

Ford, H. (2014). Big Data and Small: Collaborations between ethnographers and data scientists. Big Data & Society, 1(2), pp.1-3. Fuchs, C. (2017). From digital positivism and administrative big data analytics towards critical digital and social media research! European journal of communication, 32(1), pp.37-49. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Fuller, M. (2015). Big data: new science, new challenges, new dialogical opportunities. Zygon, 50(3), pp.569-582. Gil de Zúñiga, H. & Diehl, T. (2017). Citizenship, Social Media, and Big Data. Social science computer review, 35(1), pp.3-9. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Goffey, A., Pettinger, L. & Speed, E. (2014). Politics, policy and privatization in the everyday experience of big data in the NHS. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.31-50. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Hammer, M. J. (2017). Research ethics in big data. Oncology nursing forum, 44(3), pp.293-295. Hand, M. (2014). From cyberspace to the dataverse: trajectories in digital social research. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.1-30. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Hasselbach, G. & Tranberg, P. (2016). Data ethics – the new competitive advantage. Publishare. Helbing, D. (2018). Societal, Economic, Ethical and Legal Challenges of the Digital Revolution: From Big Data to Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, and Manipulative Technologies. Towards Digital Enlightenment (pp.47-72), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Herschel, R. & Miori, V. M. (2017). Ethics & Big Data. Technology in society, 49, pp.31-36. Hillyard, S. (2014). ‘Where no-one can hear you scream’: an analysis of the potential of ‘Big Data’ for rural research in the British context. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.231-250. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Krotoski, A. K. (2012). Data-driven research: open data opportunities for growing knowledge, and ethical issues that arise. Insights - the UKSG Journal, 25(1), pp.28-32. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Larsson, A. O. (2015). Studying Big Data – ethical and methodological considerations. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.141-156. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.




https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-319-90869-4_6



https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/2048-7754.25.1.28/



9

Light, B., Mitchell, P. & Wikström, P. (2018). Big data, method and the ethics of location: a case study of a hookup app for men who have sex with men. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge. Lohmeier, C. (2014). The researcher and the never-ending field: reconsidering big data and digital ethnography. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.75-90. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Luka, M. E. & Millette, M. (2018). (Re)framing big data: activating situated knowledges and a feminist ethics of care in social media research. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Markham, A. (2016). OKCupid data release fiasco: It’s time to rethink ethics education. Medium. Accessed: 18-06-2018. Markham, A. N. (2017). Troubling the concept of data in digital qualitative research. In Flick, U. (Ed.) (2017). Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection, pp.511-523. London: Sage. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2017). Research ethics in context: Decision making in digital research. In Schäfer, M. T. & van Es, K. (Eds.) (2017). The Datafied Society: Studying culture through data, pp.201-209. Amsterdam University Press B.V. McQuillan, D. (2018). People’s councils for ethical machine learning. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Metcalf, J., Boyd, D. & Keller, E. (2016). Perspectives on Big Data, Ethics, and Society. Council for Big Data, Ethics, and Society. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Metcalf, J. & Crawford, K. (2016). Where are human subjects in Big Data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1), pp.1-14. Oboler, A., Welsh, K. & Cruz, L. (2012). The danger of big data: Social media as computational social science. First Monday, 17(7). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Pascalev, M. (2017). Privacy exchanges: Restoring consent in privacy self-management. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(1), pp.39-48. Pink, S. & Lanzeni, D. (2018). Future anthropology ethics and datafication: temporality and responsibility in research. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Prabhu, R. (2015). Big Data – big trouble? In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.157-172. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.

http://journals.sagepub.com/page/sms/collections/ethics-as-method




https://points.datasociety.net/okcupid-data-release-fiasco-ba0388348cd#.g4ofbpnc6


https://bdes.datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Perspectives-on-Big-Data.pdf

http://firstmonday.org/article/view/3993/3269/





10

Redon, E. D. & Centi, A. (2019). Realities of conducting digital health research: Challenges to consider. Digital Health, 5, SAGE Publications. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Schweitzer, L. A. & Afzalan, N. (2017). Four Reasons Why AICP Needs an Open Data Ethic. American Planning Association. Journal of the American Planning Association, 83(2), pp.161-167. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Segadal, K. U. (2015). Possibilities and limitations of Internet research: A legal framework. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.35-47. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Smith, R. J. (2014). Missed miracles and mystical connections: qualitative research, digital social science and big data. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.181-204. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Steen-Johnsen, K. & Enjolras, B. (2015). Social research and Big Data – the tension between opportunities and realities. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.122-140. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Sylvia IV, J. J. (2016). Little brother: how big data necessitates an ethical shift from privacy to power. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.13-28. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Taylor, L. (2016). The ethics of big data as a public good: which public? Whose good? Philosophical transactions - Royal Society. Mathematical, Physical and engineering sciences, 374(2083). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Trottier, D. (2014) Big data ambivalence: visions and risks in practice. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.51-74. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Vayena, E., Haeusermann, T., Adjekum, A. & Blasimme, A. (2018). Digital health: meeting the ethical and policy challenges. Swiss Medical Weekly, 148(34), EMH Swiss Medical Publishers, Ltd. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Wang, Y. (2016). Big opportunities and big concerns of big data in education. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 60(4), pp.381-384. Weller, K. (2015). Accepting the challenges of social media research. Online Information Review, 39(3), pp.281-289. Zimmer M. (2016). OkCupid Study Reveals the Perils of Big-Data Science. Wired. Accessed: 14-06-2018. Zimmer, M. (2018). Addressing conceptual gaps in big data research ethics: an application of contextual integrity. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2055207619869466


https://socialinnovation.usc.edu/files/2017/06/Schweitzer-Journal-Article-2.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5124068/

https://smw.ch/article/doi/smw.2018.14571


https://www.wired.com/2016/05/okcupid-study-reveals-perils-big-data-science/




11

Zimmer, M. & Proferes, N. J. (2014). A topology of Twitter research: disciplines, methods, and ethics. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66 (3), pp.250-261. Zook, M., S. Barocas, D., Boyd, K. Crawford, E. Keller, S. P. Gangadharan, A. Goodman, et al. (2017). Ten simple rules for responsible big data research. PLoS Computational Biology 13 (3). Accessed: 28-09-2018. Zwitter, A. (2014). Big Data ethics. Big Data & Society, 1(2). Accessed: 26-09-2018.

https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005399&type=printable



12

CASE STUDIES


13

3. Case studies This category contains research with focus on specific topics, such as countries and their developments (Fayoyin, 2017; Assay, 2017), Foucault’s “Governmentality” (Elichirigoity, 2019), sexual cultures (Allen, 2009), fandom (Bennett, et al., 2016), piracy (Carey, 2012), branding feminism (Bandonis & Booth, 2016), youth suicide (Eskisabel-Azpiazu, et. al. 2017) and much more. Dive into the literature in this category to learn more about previous case studies on digital research. Aarsand, P. & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing children's corporeal privacy: ethnographic video recording as material-discursive practice. Qualitative research, 10(2), pp.249-268. Abasi, A. R. & Taylor, M. C. (2007). Tackling the issues and challenges of using video data in adult literacy research. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 47(2), pp.289-307. Akpojivi, U. (2017). Rethinking information privacy in a “connected” world. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.268-285. Information Science Reference (ISR). Alcántara, H. (2019). Collective construction of identity in the internet: ethical dimension and intercultural perspective. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.229–241. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 29-10-2019. Allen, L. (2009). "Snapped": Researching the sexual cultures of schools using visual methods. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 22(5), pp.549-561. Amazeen, M. A. & O’Sullivan-Gavin, S. (2016). “Rogue” advertising in the digital age: creative reputation building or industry irresponsibility? In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.123-137. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Assay, B. E. (2017). Intellectual property rights and the protection of Africa’s traditional knowledge. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.25-43. Information Science Reference (ISR). Bakare, A. A. (2018). Digital Libraries and Copyright of Intellectual Property. Advances in Library and Information Science (pp.377-395), IGI Global. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Balmer, C., Griffiths, F. & Dunn, J. (2015). A review of the issues and challenges involved in using participant-produced photographs in nursing research. Journal of advanced nursing, 71(7), pp.1726-1737. Bandonis, M. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Branding feminism: corporate blogging and the shaky relationship between ideology and profitability. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.279-294. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9783846742006/BP000016.xml


https://www.igi-global.com/gateway/chapter/188558


14

Banks, W. & Eble, M. (2007). Digital spaces, online environments, and human participant research: interfacing with institutional review boards. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.27-47. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Barker, J. & Weller, S. (2003). “Is it fun?” Developing children centered research methods. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23(1/2), pp.33–58. Barratt, M. J. & Maddox, A. (2016). Active engagement with stigmatised communities through digital ethnography. Qualitative research, 16(6), pp.701-719. Bassett, E. H. & O’Riordan, K. (2002). Ethics of Internet Research: Contesting the Human Subjects Research Model. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.233-247. Bennett, L., Chin, B. & Jones, B. (2016). Between ethics, privacy, fandom, and social media: new trajectories that challenge media producer/fan relations. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.107-122. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Bishop, L. & Gray, D. (2017). Ethical Challenges of Publishing and Sharing Social Media Research Data. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.159-187. Blair, K. & Tulley, C. (2007). Whose research is it, anyway?: the challenge of developing feminist methodology in technological spaces. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.303-317. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Bolt, B. (2016). Whither the aesthetic alibi: ethics and the challenge of art as research in the academy. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.187-199. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Boydell, K. M., Solimine, C. & Jackson, S. (2016). Visually embodying psychosis: the ethics of performing difficult experiences. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.201-210. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Bruckman, A. (2002). Studying the Amateur Artist: A Perspective on Disguising Data Collected in Human Subjects Research on the Internet. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.217-231. Accessed: 13-11-2019. Brunton, F. & Nissenbaum H. (2013). Political and Ethical Perspectives on Data Obfuscation. In Hildebrandt, M. & de Vries, K. (2013). Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn, pp.164-188. New York: Routledge. Burkholder, C. & MacEntee, K. (2016). Exploring the ethics of the participant-produced archive: the complexities of dissemination. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J.

https://link-springer-com.zorac.aub.aau.dk/article/10.1023/A%3A1021316409277



15

(Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.211-224. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Burden, D. & Savin-Baden, M. (2019). Digital Ethics. In Burden, D. & Savin-Baden, M. (2019). Virtual Humans – today and tomorrow, pp.181-196. Chapman and Hall/CRC. Burnett, J., Chandler, S. & Lopez, J. (2007). A report from the digital contact zone: collaborative research and the hybridizing of cultural mindsets. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.319-336. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Busch, T. (2016). Corporate responsibility in the videogames industry: mapping the territory. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.63-81. New York: Peter Lang. Butakov, S., Schherbinin, V., Diagilev, V. & Tskhay, A. (2019). Embedding plagiarism detection mechanisms into learning management systems. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.216-231. IGI Global. Bøge, A. R. & Lauritsen, P. (2017). Reassembling Surveillance Creep. Akademisk Kvarter, 15, pp.27-39. Carey, B. (2012). Permissible piracy? In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.164-177. New York: Peter Lang. Casey, E. (2018). The need for translational research in digital investigation. Digital Investigation, 26 (pp.1-2), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 09-09-2019. Chess, S. (2016). Not your mother’s video game: the role of motherhood in video game advertising. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.295-307. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Clark, A. (2011). Breaking methodological boundaries? Exploring visual, participatory methods with adults and young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), pp.321-330. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Clark, A. (2013). Haunted by Images? Ethical Moments and Anxieties in Visual Research. Methodological Innovations Online, 8(2), pp.68–81. Clark, L. S. (2016). The ethics of engagement: considering digital ethics in a critical participatory action research project with urban youth. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.167-187. New York: Peter Lang. Clarke, R. & Taylor, K. (2018). Towards responsible data analytics: a process approach. 31ST Bled econference: digital transformation: meeting the challenges, 2018, Bled, Slovenia, conference proceedings. Pucihar, A., Kljajić Borštnar. M., Ravesteijn, P., Seitz, J. & Bons, R.





16

Clemens, J. & Nash, A. (2018). Irremediability. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.29-60. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Culver, K. B. & Mirer, M. (2016). Constrained independence: digital branded content in sports through the lens of journalism ethics. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.19-39. New York: Peter Lang. Cutter-Mackenzie, A., Edwards, S. & Quinton, H.W. (2015). Childframed video research methodologies: issues, possibilities and challenges for researching with children. Children's Geographies, 13(3), pp.343-356. Davidson, J., Dottin, J. W., Penna, S. L. & Robertson, S. P. (2009). Visual sources and the qualitative research dissertation: Ethics, evidence and the politics of academia--moving innovation in higher education from the center to the margins. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 10(27). Davisson, A. (2016). Passing around women’s bodies online: identity, privacy, and free speech on Reddit. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.44-57. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. DeLuca, K. (2019). Fostering Phronesis in Digital Rhetorics. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics - Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.231-247. New York: Routledge. Diara, F. (2019). Cultural Heritage Digital Data: Future and Ethics. In Kremers, H. (2019). Digital Cultural Heritage. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Dickens, L. & Butcher, M. (2016). Going public? Re-thinking visibility, ethics and recognition through participatory research praxis. Transaction of the institute of British Geographers, 41(4), pp.528–540. Dieterle, B., Edwards, D. & Martin, P. D. (2019). Confronting Digital Aggression with an Ethics of Circulation. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.197-213. New York: Routledge. Dineen, M. (2018). Digital Convergence and Musical Ethics. Encyclopedia of Business and Professional Ethics (pp.1-4), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 10-09-2019. Donoghue, G. & Miller, E. (2016). ‘I understand. I am a participant’: navigating the ‘fuzzy’ boundaries of visual methods in qualitative longitudinal research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.129-139. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315107479/chapters/10.4324/9781315107479-2


https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-3-319-23514-1_401-1


17

Doyle, E. (2017). Embracing qualitative research: a visual model for nuanced research ethics oversight. Qualitative research, 17(1), pp.95-117. Accessed: 28-09-2018. Dunseath, S., Weibel, N., Bloss, C. S. & Nebeker, C. (2018). NIH support of mobile, imaging, pervasive sensing, social media and location tracking (MISST) research: laying the foundation to examine research ethics in the digital age. Npj Digital Medicine, 1(1), Springer Nature. Accessed: 10-09-2019. Edmonds, F., Evans, M., McQuire, S. & Chenhall, R. (2016). Ethical considerations when using visual methods in digital storytelling with aboriginal young people in Southeast Australia. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.171-184. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Elgesem, D. 2002. What is Special about the Ethical Issues in Online Research? Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.195-203. Accessed: 13-11-2019. Elichirigoity, F. (2019). The internet, information machines, and the technologies of the Self. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.289–300. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 19-10-2019. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Beyond Ethics – communicating wisely. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2019). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.171-189. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accessed: 12-09-2019. Eskisabel-Azpiazu, A., Cerezo-Menéndez, R. & Gayo-Avello, D. (2017). An ethical inquiry into youth suicide prevention using social media mining. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.227-234. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Fairfield, J. & Shtein, H. (2014). Big Data, Big Problems: Emerging Issues in the Ethics of Data Science and Journalism. Journal of mass media ethics, 29(1), pp.38-51. Falconer, L. (2013). Situated learning in virtual simulations: Researching the authentic dimension in virtual worlds. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 24(3), pp.285-300. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Fayoyin, A. (2017). Electoral polling and reporting in Africa: professional and policy implications for media practice and political communication in a digital age. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.164-181. Information Science Reference (ISR). Fernback, J. (2016). Privacy rights and data brokers: the ethics of a targeted surveillance regime. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.207. New York: Peter Lang.



https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-017-0001-5






https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118968888.ch10



http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/16628/3/Situated%20learning%20researching%20authentic%20dimension%20JILR.pdf



18

Fiesler, C. & Proferes, N. (2018). “Participant” perceptions of twitter research ethics. Social media + society. Accessed: 14-10-2019. Flick, C. (2015). Informed consent and the Facebook emotional manipulation study. Research ethics, 12(1). Accessed: 14-10-2019. Ford, S. (2016). Perfectly “compliant”: the devaluation of ethics in corporate communication industry discourse. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.155-171. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Fourie, P. J. (2017). Normative media theory in the digital media landscape: from media ethics to ethical communication. Communication, 43(2) (pp.109-127), Informa UK Limited. Accessed: 16-09-2019. Franke, K. & Årnes, A. (2017). Challenges in Digital Forensics. In Flaglien, A., Sunde, I. M., Dilijonaite, A., Hamm, J., Sandvik, J. P., Bjelland, P., Franke, K. & Axelsson, S. (2017). Digital Forensics, pp.313-317. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Frohmann, B. (2018). Foucault, Deleuze, and the Ethics of Digital Networks. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (2018). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.57-68. Wilhelm Fink. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Frosh, P. (2018). You have been tagged. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.117-136. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Fuchs, C. (2018). “Dear Mr. Neo-Nazi, Can You Please Give Me Your Informed Consent So That I Can Quote Your Fascist Tweet?“. Questions of Social Media Research Ethics in Online Ideology Critique. In Meikle, G. (Ed.) (2018). The Routledge Companion to Media and Activism, pp.385-394. Abingdon: Routledge. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Gallagher, John R. (2019). A Pedagogy of Ethical Interface Production Based on Virtue Ethics. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics - Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.69-84. New York: Routledge. Gelms, B. T. (2019). Volatile Visibility. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.179-194. New York: Routledge. Gekker, A. (2012). Legionnaries of chaos: “anonymous” and governmental oversight of the internet. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.178-192. New York: Peter Lang. Goodman, K. W. (2017). Introduction: Symposium on Ethical Issues in Data Science and Digital Medicine. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 26(2) (pp.326-327), Cambridge University Press (CUP). Accessed: 16-09-2019.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2056305118763366?icid=int.sj-full-text.similar-articles.3

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1747016115599568

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02500167.2017.1331927




http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/socialmediaresearchethics.pdf



https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-quarterly-of-healthcare-ethics/article/introduction-symposium-on-ethical-issues-in-data-science-and-digital-medicine/26CE60B8558BF8E35EBF0F8C37AD5724



19

Goodyear, V. A. (2017). Social media, apps and wearable technologies: navigating ethical dilemmas and procedures. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 9(3), pp.285-302. Gray, B., Hilder, J., Macdonald, L., Tester, R., Dowell, A. & Stubbe, M. (2016). Are research ethics guidelines culturally competent? Research Ethics, 13 (1), pp.23-41. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Grincheva, N. (2017). Museum ethnography in the digital age: ethical considerations. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.187-194. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Gruwell, L. (2019). Feminist Research on the Toxic Web. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.87-103. New York: Routledge. Gubrium, A., Fiddian-Green, A. & Hill, A. (2016). Conflicting aims and minimizing harm: uncovering experiences of trauma in digital storytelling with young women. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.157-170. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Guest, C. (2016). Cultivating reflexive research practice when using participants’ photographs as research data. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.75-87. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Hagen, L. (2017). Overcoming the Privacy Challenges of Wearable Devices. Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research - dg.o '17, ACM Press. Accessed: 16-09-2019. Halford, S. (2017). The Ethical Disruptions of Social Media Data: Tales from the Field. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.13-25. Hea, A. K. (2007). Riding the wave: articulating a critical methodology for web research practices. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.269-286. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Hinkson, M. (2017). At the edges of the visual culture of exile: a glimpse from South Australia. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.93-104. Hoffmann, A. L. & Jonas, A. (2017). Recasting justice for internet and online industry research ethics. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.3-18. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.




https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=3085228.3085254




20

Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N. J. & Hillman, A. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people's engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 17(3), pp.360-375. Holt, T. J., Bossler, A. M. & Seigfried-Spellar, K. C. (2017). Legal Challenges in Digital Forensic Investigations. In Holt, T.J., Bossler, A. M. & Seigfried-Spellar, K. C. (2017). Cybercrime and Digital Forensics, pp.571-621. London: Routledge. Hong, S. (2018). Surveillance, sensors, and knowledge through the machine. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.137-155. London: Routledge. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Hongladarom, S. (2017). Internet research ethics in a non-western context. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.151-163. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Hutchinson, J., Martin, F. & Sinpeng, A. (2017). Chasing ISIS: network power, distributed ethics and responsible social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.57-71. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Hård af Segerstad, Y., Kasperowski, D., Kullenberg, C. & Howes, C. (2017). Studying closed communities on-line: digital methods and ethical considerations beyond informed consent and anonymity. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.213-225. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Introna, L. D. (2019). Virtual Strangers: On the Social and Ethical Conditions of Virtual Communities. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.95–108. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 16-09-2019. Jahun, U. S. (2017). Online and Offline: The Ethical Considerations of Researching the Use of Social Media by Traditional Journalists in Northern Nigerian Newsroom. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (Eds.) (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.129-133. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Johnson, J. D. (2017). Ethics, Agency, and Power. In Hess, A. & Davisson, A. (Eds.) (2017). Theorizing Digital Rhetoric, pp.196-208. New York: Routledge. Jung, H. (2016). Fuzzy boundaries when using “mental mapping” methods to trade the experiences of immigrant women in South Korea. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.31-44. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.











21

Kantanen, H. & Manninen, J. (2016). Hazy boundaries: virtual communities and research ethics. Media and communication, 4(4), pp.86-96. Kelly, P., Marshall, S. J., Badland, H., Kerr, J., Oliver, M. & Doherty, A. R. et al. (2013). An Ethical Framework for Automated, Wearable Cameras in Health Behavior Research. American journal of preventive medicine, 44(3), pp.314-319. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Kennedy, K. & Wilson, N. (2019). The banality of digital aggression. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.214-230. New York: Routledge. Kergel, D. (2017). The Postmodern Dialogue and the Ethics of Digital Based Learning. In Kergel, D., Heidkamp, B., Telléus, P. K., Rachwal, T. & Nowakowski, S. (Eds.) (2017). The Digital Turn in Higher Education, pp.47-57. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Kerpen, D., Dorgeist, M. & Zantis, S. (2017). Intersecting the Digital Maze. Considering Ethics in Cloud-Based Services’ Research. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.143-152. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Khan, Z. R. (2019). What category are they anyway? Proposing a new taxonomy for factors that may influence students’ likelihood to E-cheat. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.148-175. IGI Global. Khoja, N., (2016). Situating Children’s Voices: Considering the Context When Conducting Research with Young Children. Children & Society, 30, pp.314-322. Kong, E., Hog, S. C., Gussen, B. F., Turner, J. & Abawi, L. (2019). Strategies on addressing contract cheating: a case study from an Australian regional university. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.176-199. IGI Global. Kosinski, M., Matz, S. C., Gosling, S. D., Popov, V. & Stillwell, D. (2015). Facebook as a research tool for the social sciences: Opportunities, challenges, ethical considerations, and practical guidelines. The American psychologist, 70(6), pp.543-556. Kouppanou, A. & Standish, P. (2013). Ethics, Phenomenology and Ontology. In Price, S., Jewitt, C. & Brown, B. (Eds.) (2013). The SAGE Handbook of Digital Technology Research. SAGE publications, pp.102-116. Krotoski, A. K. (2012). Data-driven research: open data opportunities for growing knowledge, and ethical issues that arise. Insights - the UKSG Journal, 25(1), pp.28-32. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Krug, M. & Heuser, S. (2018). Ethics in the field: research practice in audio-visual studies. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018.

https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(12)00862-8/fulltext






22

Lagerkvist, A. (2018). The internet is always awake. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.189-209. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Larsen, M. C. & Glud, L. N. (2013). Nye medier, nye metoder, nye etiske udfordringer. Metode & Forskningsdesign, 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Lauber-Rönsberg, A. (2017). Data Protection Laws, Research Ethics and Social Sciences. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.29-44. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Laursen, D., Sandvik, K. & Brügger, N. (2017). Metoder til indsamling af internetmateriale og deres effekt på senere analyser med Facebook som eksempel. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.31-49. Frederiksberg. Samfundslitteratur. Lenette, C. (2017). Using digital storytelling in participatory research with refugee women. London: SAGE. Lindgren, A. (2012). Ethical issues in pedagogical documentation: Representations of children through digital technology. International Journal of Early Childhood, 44(3), pp.327-340. Light, B., Mitchell, P. & Wikström, P. (2018). Big data, method and the ethics of location: a case study of a hookup app for men who have sex with men. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge. Literat, I. & Brough, M. (2019). From Ethical to Equitable Social Media Technologies: Amplifying Underrepresented Youth Voices in Digital Technology Design. Journal of Media Ethics, 34(3) (pp.132-145), Informa UK Limited. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Lunceford, B. (2016). Programs or people? Participation and the ethics of hacktivism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.77-90. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D. & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical Use of Social Media to Facilitate Qualitative Research. Qualitative health research, 25(1), pp.99-109. Luka, M. E. & Millette, M. (2018). (Re)framing big data: activating situated knowledges and a feminist ethics of care in social media research. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Luka, M. E., Millette, M. & Wallace, J. (2017). A feminist perspective on ethical digital methods. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for


https://tidsskrift.dk/index.php/mf/article/view/8268



https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23736992.2019.1638259







23

the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.21-36. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Magalhães, J. C. (2018). Do algorithms shape character? Considering algorithmic ethical subjectivation. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Markham, A. N. (2018). Afterword: Ethics as Impact—Moving From Error-Avoidance and Concept-Driven Models to a Future-Oriented Approach. Social media and society, 4(3). Markham, A. N. (2005). The methods, politics, and ethics of representation in online ethnography. In Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.) (2005). The sage handbook of qualitative research, 3, pp.793-820. Sage. Martinez-Martin, N., Insel, T. R., Dagum, P., Greely, H. T. & Cho, M. K. (2018). Data mining for health: staking out the ethical territory of digital phenotyping. Npj Digital Medicine, 1(1), Springer Nature. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Massanari, A. L. (2018). Rethinking research ethics, power, and the risk of visibility in the “Alt-Right” gaze. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. McGeeney, E. (2015). Live tweeting and building the digital archive; #NFQLR – who and what is it for? International journal of social research methodology, 18(3), pp.307-319. McKee, H. A. & Porter, J. E. (2009). The ethics of Internet research: a rhetorical, case-based process. New York: Peter Lang. Metcalf, J. & Crawford, K. (2016). Where are human subjects in Big Data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1), pp.1-14. Miko-Schefzig, K. & Reiter, C. (2018). Participatory Organization Research in the Context of the Police: Ethical Research with Vulnerable Groups Using the Example of Detention Centers. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018. Miller, V. (2018). The ethics of digital being. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence - Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence in Digital Culture, pp.171-186. London: Routledge. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Moats, D. & Perriam, J. (2017). How does it feel to be visualized? In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.255-265. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Monks, H., Cardoso, P., Papageorgiou, A., Carolan, C., Costello, L. & Thomas, L. (2015). Young people's views regarding participation in mental health and wellbeing research through social media. International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(1), pp.4-19. Accessed: 26-09-2018.












https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.dk/&httpsredir=1&article=4080&context=ecuworkspost2013



24

Mukherjee, I. (2017). Case study of ethical and privacy concerns in a digital ethnography of South Asian blogs against intimate partner violence. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.203-212. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Mullins, M. & Doyle, E. (2010). Establishing a research ethics committee in a business school: a chairperson’s perspective. Research ethics, 6(4). Neilson, T. (2018). Digital Media, Conventional Methods: Using Video Interviews to Study the Labor of Digital Journalism. In Levenberg, L., Neilsen, T. & Rheams, D. (Eds.) (2018). Research Methods for the Digital Humanities, pp.151-171. Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 09-09-2019. Nenadic, I. (2017). Journalists on Twitter: Reconfiguring Professional Identity, Reconsidering Research Ethics – The Case of Croatia. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.111-117. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Nielsen, L. Y. & Larsen, M. C. (2018). Metodiske tilgange til digital ungdomsforskning: Refleksioner over forskning i unges brug af weblogs og fotodelingsapplikationen Snapchat. I Pless, M. & Sørensen, N. U. (Red.). Ungeperspektiver: Tænkninger og tilgange i ungdomsforskningen, 7, pp.173-195. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Ungdomsliv. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R. & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). E-Research: Ethics, Security, Design, and Control in Psychological Research on the Internet. Journal of social issues, 58(1), pp.161–176. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Oakley, R. L. & Singh, R. (2019). Examining ethical decision making behavior in E-Learning systems: a socio-technical analysis. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.52-68. IGI Global. Olivero, N. & Lunt, P. (2004). The Case of E-Mail Qualitative Interviews. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.101-113. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Pandey, I. (2007). Researching (with) the postnational “other”: ethics, methodologies, and qualitative studies of literacy. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.107-125. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Pangestu, M. & Dewi, G. (2017). 13. Indonesia and the digital economy: creative destruction, opportunities and challenges. In Edwin Jurriens (Ed.) (2017). Digital Indonesia: Connectivity and Divergence, pp. 227–255. Singapore: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute Singapore. Peters, J. (2016). Considering and constraining the power of content hosts. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.105-122. New York: Peter Lang.



https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/174701611000600405




http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~banaji/research/publications/articles/2002_Nosek_JSI.pdf



25

Pimienta, D. (2019). At the boundaries of ethics and cultures: virtual communities as an open ended process carrying the will for social change (the >>MISTICA<< experience). In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.205–228. Leiden, The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 18-09-2019. Power, K. (2019). Ethical problems in virtual research: Enmeshing the blurriness with Twitter data. E-Learning and Digital Media, 16(3), pp.196-207. SAGE Publications. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Proctor, D. (2018). Cybernetic animism. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.227-241. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Puurveen, G., Phinney, A., Cox, S. & Purves, B. (2016). Ethical considerations in the use of video observations in dementia end-of-life care research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.105-115. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Ragas, J. (2019). Digital Resources: Digital Peru. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin American History. London: Oxford University Press. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Reidenberg, J. R. (2000). Resolving Conflicting International Data Privacy Rules in Cyberspace. Cyberspace and privacy: A new legal paradigm? 52(5), pp.1315-1376. Rice, J. (2019). Professorial Outrage. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.123-140. New York: Routledge. Richardson, L. (2018). Ethical Challenges in Digital Public Archaeology. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology, 1(1) (pp.64-73), Ubiquity Press, Ltd. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Richardson, I., Hjorth, L., Strengers, Y. & Balmford, W. (2017). Careful surveillance at play: human-animal relations and mobile media in the home. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.105-116. Rickly, R. (2007). Messy contexts: research as a rhetorical situation. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.377-397. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Roberts, D. (2017). ‘Getting What They Deserve’: Digital Media Readers Comment on the Cause of Detroit’s Bankruptcy. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.107-110. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Robson, J. (2017). Participant anonymity and participant observations: situating the researcher within digital ethnography. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017).






https://oxfordre.com/latinamericanhistory/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199366439.001.0001/acrefore-9780199366439-e-716

https://journal.caa-international.org/articles/10.5334/jcaa.13/




26

Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.195-202. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Rogers, R. (2016). The harm of video games: the ethics behind regulating minors’ access to violent video games in light of the supreme court ruling. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.216-230. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Rogers, R., Labadie, M. & Pole, K., (2016). Balancing voice and protection in literacy studies with young children. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 16(1), pp.34-59. Romberger, J. (2007). An ecofeminist methodology: studying the ecological dimensions of the digital environment. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.249-267. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Sabao, C. & Chingwaramusee, V. R. (2017). Citizen journalism on Facebook and the challenges of media regulation in Zimbabwe: Baba Jukwa. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.193-206. Information Science Reference (ISR). Sapienza, F. (2007). Ethos and research positionality in studies of virtual communities. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.89-106. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Saunders, B., Kitzinger, J. & Kitzinger, C. (2015). Participant Anonymity in the Internet Age: From Theory to Practice. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), pp.125-137. Schaer, P. (2017). Living labs – an ethical challenge for researchers and platform operators. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.167-176. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Schinzel, B. (2019). Gendered views on the ethics of computer professionals. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.) (2019). Localizing the internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.121–134. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 18-09-2019. Schwarz, J. A. (2018). Umwelt and individuation. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.61-80. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Schwartz, M. (2018). Thrownness, vulnerability, care. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.81-99. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019.



https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315107479/chapters/10.4324/9781315107479-3¨



27

Shoenberger, H. (2017). Targeted Digital Advertising and Privacy. In Rodgers, S. & Thorson, E. (2017). Digital Advertising – theory and research, pp.300-309. New York: Routledge. Seko, Y. & Lewis, S. P. (2017). “We tend to err on the side of caution”: ethical challenges facing Canadian research ethics boards when overseeing internet research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.133-147.New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Shuter, J. & Burroughs, B. (2017). The ethics of sensory ethnography: virtual reality fieldwork in zones of conflict. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.281-285. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Sicart, M. (2012). Instrumental play of the moral risks of gamification. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.210-230. New York: Peter Lang. Sidler, M. (2007). Playing scavenger and gazer with scientific discourse: opportunities and ethics for online research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.71-86. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Smith, B. (2007). Researching hybrid literacies: methodological explorations of “ethnography” and the practices of the cybertariat. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.127-149. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Sparks, H., Collins, F. L. & Kearns, R. (2016). Reflecting on the risks and ethical dilemmas of digital research. Geoforum, 77, pp.40-46. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Stroud, S. R. (2016). “Be a bully to beat a bully”: Twitter ethics, online identity, and the culture of quick revenge. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.264-278. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Sugiura, L., Wiles, R. & Pope, C. (2016). Ethical challenges in online research: Public/private perceptions. Research Ethics, 13(3-4). Accessed: 14-10-2019. Sumiala, J. (2018). Digital rituals and the quest for existential security. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.210-226. London: Routledge. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Suomela, T., Chee, F., Berendt, B. & Rockwell, G. (2019). Applying an Ethics of Care to Internet Research: Gamergate and Digital Humanities. Digital Studies/Le champ numérique, 9(1), Open Library of the Humanities. Accessed: 03-09-2019.





https://kundoc.com/pdf-reflecting-on-the-risks-and-ethical-dilemmas-of-digital-research-.html





https://www.digitalstudies.org/articles/10.16995/dscn.302/



28

Taylor, J. & Pagliari,, C. (2017). Mining social media data: how are research sponsors and researchers addressing the ethical challenges? Research Ethics, 14(2). Accessed: 14-10-2019. Tedder, V. (2016). Digital stories and handmade skills: explorations in how digital methods can be used to study transmissions of skill. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.157-170. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Third, A., Livingstong, S. & Lansdown, G. (2019). Recognizing children’s rights in relation to digital technologies: challenges of voice and evidence, principle and practice. In Wagner, B., Kettemann, M. C. & Vieth, K. (Eds.) (2019). Research Handbook on Human Rights and Digital Technology, pp.376-410. Edward Elgar Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Tiidenberg, K. (2018). Research ethics, vulnerability, and trust on the internet. In Hunsinger, J., Klastrup, L. & Allen, M. (Eds.) (2018). Second international handbook of internet research, pp.1-15. Dordrecht. Springer. Tilton, S. (2016). “Steve Jobs is dead”: iReport and the ethos of citizen journalism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.138-152. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Torres, J. R. F. & Warr, D. (2016). Using visual research methods to explore first-person accounts of suicide behavior. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.141-155. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Tromble, R. & Stockmann, D. (2017). Lost umbrellas: bias and the right to be forgotten in social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.75-91. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Turin, M. (2011). Born Archival: The Ebb and Flow of Digital Documents from the Field. History and Anthropology, 22(4), pp.445–460. Van den Hoonaard, W. C. (2018). Autobiographical notes from inside the ethics regime: some thoughts on how researchers in the social sciences can own ethics. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018. Vayena, E., Haeusermann, T., Adjekum, A. & Blasimme, A. (2018). Digital health: meeting the ethical and policy challenges. Swiss Medical Weekly, 148(34), EMH Swiss Medical Publishers, Ltd. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Völcker, M. & Bruns, A. (2018). Digital self-presentation: the subjective meaning of selfies for adolescents and young adults. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018.



https://www.elgaronline.com/view/edcoll/9781785367717/9781785367717.00029.xml











29

Watley, E. (2016). Race, gender, and digital media: the mis-adventures of awkward black girl and the representations of black female identity. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.248-263. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Weller, K. (2014). What do we get from Twitter- and what not? A close look at Twitter research in the social sciences. Knowledge organization, 41(3), pp.238-248. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. E. (2014). “I love thinking about ethics!” Perspectives on ethics in social media research. Internet Research (IR15), Deagu, South Korea, 22. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Wengenmeir, M. (2017). Twitter research in the disaster context – ethical concerns for working with historical datasets. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.293-299. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Whelan, A. (2018). Ethics are admin: Australian human research ethics review forms as (un)ethical actors. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Wildermuth, S. (2016). When privates are public: ethical issues in news media coverage of transgender people. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.202-215. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Williams, M. L., Burnap, P., Sloan, L., Jessop, C. & Lepps, H. (2017). Users’ View of Ethics in Social Media Research: Informed Consent, Anonymity and Harm. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.27-52. Windle, A. (2018). An Atmosphere Ethics for Digital Transcription and Reading Spheres Communally. A Companion of Feminisms for Digital Design and Spherology, pp.31-52. Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Yang, K. H. (2015). Voice, authenticity and ethical challenges: the participatory dissemination of youth-generated visual data over social media. Visual studies, 30(3), pp.309-318. Young, A. & MacDowall, L. (2017). Visual documentation in hybrid spaces: ethics, publics and transition. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.81-91. Zimmer, M. & Proferes, N. J. (2014). A topology of Twitter research: disciplines, methods, and ethics. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66 (3), pp.250-261. Önacan, M. B. K., Uluag, M., Önel, T. & Medeni, T. D. (2019). Selection of plagiarism detection software and its integration into Moodle for universities: en example of open source software use in developing countries. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.200-215. IGI Global.

https://katrinweller.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/hiddendataethics_wellerkinder-kurlanda_ir15-preprint.pdf









30


31

CHALLENGES


32

4. Challenges Specific ethical challenges that researchers have encountered in their digital research is of focus in this category. These challenges include the methodological challenges of collecting Twitter data (Ahmed, et. al., 2017), challenges in developing transdisciplinary strategies (Casey et. al., 2018), children’s “digital” rights (Third, et. al., 2019), overcoming the legal challenges of news reporting (Bishop, 2017), and much more. Use our online search engine to search across the categories and find the connections you need, by clicking here.

Aarsand, P. (2016). Children’s media practices: challenges and dilemmas for the qualitative researcher. Journal of Children and Media, 10 (1), pp.90-97. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Aarsand, P. & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing children's corporeal privacy: ethnographic video recording as material-discursive practice. Qualitative research, 10(2), pp.249-268. Abasi, A. R. & Taylor, M. C. (2007). Tackling the issues and challenges of using video data in adult literacy research. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 47(2), pp.289-307. Addison, J. (2007). Mobile technologies and phenomenology of literacy. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.171-183. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Ahmed, W., Bath, P. A. & Demartini, G. (2017). Using Twitter as a Data Source: An Overview of Ethical, Legal and Methodological Challenges. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.79-107. Alim, S. (2014). An initial exploration of ethical research practices regarding automated data extraction from online social media user profiles. First Monday, 19(7). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Allen, L. (2009). "Snapped": Researching the sexual cultures of schools using visual methods. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 22(5), pp.549-561. Andrews, T., Dyson, L. E. & Wishart, J. (2015). Advancing ethics frameworks and scenario-based learning to support educational research into mobile learning. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 38(3), pp.320-334. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Anthony, M. G. & Thomas, R. J. (2016). “The classroom is NOT a sacred space”: revisiting citizen journalism and surveillance in the digital classroom. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.29-43. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Arshad, H., Jantan, A. & Omolara, E. (2019). Evidence collection and forensics on social networks: Research challenges and directions. Digital Investigation, 28 (pp.126-138), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 03-09-2019.

https://dighumlab.org/ethical-challenges/

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17482798.2015.1121894?src=recsys




https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1743727X.2015.1026252?src=recsys





33

Ayers, D. M. (2004). Fact or fiction: notes of a man interviewing women online. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.262-273. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Baalen, S. V. (2018). ‘Google wants to know your location’: The ethical challenges of fieldwork in the digital age. Research Ethics, 14(4) (pp.1-17), SAGE Publications. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Bakare, A. A. (2018). Digital Libraries and Copyright of Intellectual Property. Advances in Library and Information Science (pp.377-395), IGI Global. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Bakioǧlu, B. S. (2016). When the inmates run the asylum: grief play in the virtual panopticon of second life. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.141-163. New York: Peter Lang. Balmer, C., Griffiths, F. & Dunn, J. (2015). A review of the issues and challenges involved in using participant-produced photographs in nursing research. Journal of advanced nursing, 71(7), pp.1726-1737. Bandonis, M. & Booth, P. (2016). Branding feminism: corporate blogging and the shaky relationship between ideology and profitability. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.279-294. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Banks, W. & Eble, M. (2007). Digital spaces, online environments, and human participant research: interfacing with institutional review boards. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.27-47. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Barratt, M. J. & Maddox, A. (2016). Active engagement with stigmatised communities through digital ethnography. Qualitative research, 16(6), pp.701-719. Bechmann, A. & Vahlstrup, P.B. (2015). Studying Facebook and Instagram data: The digital footprints software. First Monday, 20(12), 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Bishop, J. (2017). Overcoming the legal challenges of news reporting: a case study of a start-up news. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.146-163. Information Science Reference (ISR). Blair, K. & Tulley, C. (2007). Whose research is it, anyway?: the challenge of developing feminist methodology in technological spaces. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.303-317. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Blythe, S. (2007). Coding digital texts and multimedia. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.203-227. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.







34

Boyd, D. & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, communication & society, 15(5), pp.662-679. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Boydell, K. M., Solimine, C. & Jackson, S. (2016). Visually embodying psychosis: the ethics of performing difficult experiences. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.201-210. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Brooker, P., Barnett, J. Cribbin, T. & Sharma, S. (2016). Have we even solved the first ‘big data challenge’? Practical issues concerning data collection and visual representation for social media analytics. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.34-50. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Bruns, A. & Burgess, J. (2016). Methodological innovation in precarious spaces: the case of Twitter. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.17-33. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Brügger, N. (2017). Web history and social media. In Flick, U. (Ed.) (2017). The sage handbook of social media, pp.196-212. London: Sage publications. Burden, D. & Savin-Baden, M. (2019). Digital Ethics. In Burden, D. & Savin-Baden, M. (2019). Virtual Humans – today and tomorrow, pp.181-196. Chapman and Hall/CRC. Burkell, J. A. (2016). Remembering me: Big data, individual identity, and the psychological necessity of forgetting. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(1). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Busch, T. (2016). Corporate responsibility in the videogames industry: mapping the territory. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.63-81. New York: Peter Lang. Butakov, S., Schherbinin, V., Diagilev, V. & Tskhay, A. (2019). Embedding plagiarism detection mechanisms into learning management systems. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.216-231. IGI Global. Carey, B. (2012). Permissible piracy? In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.164-177. New York: Peter Lang. Carlson, C. R. (2016). Hashtags and hate speech: the legal and ethical responsibilities of social media companies to manage content online. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.123-140. New York: Peter Lang. Carpenter, K. J. & Dittrich, D. (2012). Bridging the distance: Removing the technology buffer and seeking consistent ethical analysis in computer security research. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.39-58. New York: Peter Lang.





35

Carusi, A. & Jirotka, M. (2009). From data archive to ethical labyrinth. Qualitative research, 9(3), pp.285-298. Casey, E. (2018). The need for translational research in digital investigation. Digital Investigation, 26 (pp.1-2), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 09-09-2019. Casey, E., Geradts, Z. & Nikkel, B. (2018). Transdisciplinary strategies for digital investigation challenges. Digital Investigation, 25 (pp.1-4), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Chan, S. (2013). Using videos and multimodal discourse analysis to study how students learn a trade. International Journal of Training Research, 11(1), pp.69-78. Chess, S. (2016). Not your mother’s video game: the role of motherhood in video game advertising. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.295-307. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Clark, A. (2011). Breaking methodological boundaries? Exploring visual, participatory methods with adults and young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), pp.321-330. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Clark, A. (2013). Haunted by Images? Ethical Moments and Anxieties in Visual Research. Methodological Innovations Online, 8(2), pp.68–81. Clark, K., Duckham, M., Guillemin, M., Hunter, A., McVernon, J., O’Keefe, C., Pitkin, C., Prawer, S., Sinnott, R., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2018). Advancing the ethical use of digital data in human research: challenges and strategies to promote ethical practice. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(1) (pp.59-73), Springer Science and Business Media LLC. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Clark, L. S. (2016). The ethics of engagement: considering digital ethics in a critical participatory action research project with urban youth. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.167-187. New York: Peter Lang. Condie, J., Lean, G. & Wilcockson, B. (2017). The Trouble with Tinder: The Ethical Complexities of Researching Location-Aware Social Discovery Apps. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.135-158. Cox, S., Drew, S., Guillemin, M., Howell, C., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2014). Guidelines for ethical visual research methods. Melbourne Social Equity Institute. Accessed: 09-10-2018. Culver, K. B. & Mirer, M. (2016). Constrained independence: digital branded content in sports through the lens of journalism ethics. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.19-39. New York: Peter Lang.








http://vrc.org.au/guidelines-for-ethical-visual-research-methods



36

Cutbirth, J. (2016). Cash out: philanthropy, sustainability, and ethics in nonprofit news. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.186-201. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Cutter-Mackenzie, A., Edwards, S. & Quinton, H.W. (2015). Childframed video research methodologies: issues, possibilities and challenges for researching with children. Children's Geographies, 13 (3), pp.343-356. Davidson, J., Dottin, J. W., Penna, S. L. & Robertson, S. P. (2009). Visual sources and the qualitative research dissertation: Ethics, evidence and the politics of academia--moving innovation in higher education from the center to the margins. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 10(27). Davidson, J., Paulus, T. & Jackson, K. (2016). Speculating on the Future of Digital Tools for Qualitative Research. Qualitative inquiry, 22(7), pp.606-610. Davisson, A. (2016). Passing around women’s bodies online: identity, privacy, and free speech on Reddit. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.44-57. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Dennen, V. P. (2012). When public words are not data. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.21-38. New York: Peter Lang. Derry, S. J, Pea, R. D., Barron, B., Engle, R. A., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., Hall, R., Koschmann, T., Lemke, J. L., Sherin, M. G. & Sherin, B. L. (2010) Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19 (1), pp.3-53. Doyle, E. (2017). Embracing qualitative research: a visual model for nuanced research ethics oversight. Qualitative research, 17(1), pp.95-117. Accessed: 28-09-2018. Dunseath, S., Weibel, N., Bloss, C. S. & Nebeker, C. (2018). NIH support of mobile, imaging, pervasive sensing, social media and location tracking (MISST) research: laying the foundation to examine research ethics in the digital age. Npj Digital Medicine, 1(1), Springer Nature. Accessed: 10-09-2019. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Legacy News Organizations Move from Analog to Digital. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.37-63. John Wiley & Sons. Accessed: 12-09-2019. Evans, H., Ginnis, S. & Bartlett, J. (2015). #SocialEthics: a guide to embedding ethics in social media research. Accessed: 09-10-2018. Fairfield, J. & Shtein, H. (2014). Big Data, Big Problems: Emerging Issues in the Ethics of Data Science and Journalism. Journal of mass media ethics, 29(1), pp.38-51. Fayoyin, A. (2017). Electoral polling and reporting in Africa: professional and policy implications for media practice and political communication in a digital age. In Mhiripiri, N.







https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/migrations/en-uk/files/Assets/Docs/Publications/im-demos-social-ethics-in-social-media-research-summary.pdf



37

A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.164-181. Information Science Reference (ISR). Ferguson, R. D. (2017). Negotiating consent, compensation and privacy in internet research. ParentsLikeMe.com as a case study. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.269-275. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Ford, S. (2016). Perfectly “compliant”: the devaluation of ethics in corporate communication industry discourse. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.155-171. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Franke, K. & Årnes, A. (2017). Challenges in Digital Forensics. In Flaglien, A., Sunde, I. M., Dilijonaite, A., Hamm, J., Sandvik, J. P., Bjelland, P., Franke, K. & Axelsson, S. (2017). Digital Forensics, pp.313-317. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Fuller, M. (2015). Big data: new science, new challenges, new dialogical opportunities. Zygon, 50(3), pp.569-582. Geisler, C. & Slattery, S. (2007). Capturing the activity of digital writing: using, analyzing, and supplementing video screen capture. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.185-200. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Gelms, B.t (2019). Volatile Visibility. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.179-194. New York: Routledge. Gil de Zúñiga, H. & Diehl, T. (2017). Citizenship, Social Media, and Big Data. Social science computer review, 35(1), pp.3-9. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Goodyear, V. A. (2017). Social media, apps and wearable technologies: navigating ethical dilemmas and procedures. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 9(3), pp.285-302. Graham, A. & Powell, M. A. (2015). Ethical Research Involving Children: Encouraging Reflexive Engagement in Research with Children and Young People. Children & Society, 29, pp.331-343. Gubrium, A. C., Hill, A. L. & Flicker, S. (2014). A Situated Practice of Ethics for Participatory Visual and Digital Methods in Public Health Research and Practice: A Focus on Digital Storytelling. American Journal of Public Health 104(9), pp.1606-1614. Guest, C. (2016). Cultivating reflexive research practice when using participants’ photographs as research data. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.75-87. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.





38

Gunkel, D. J. (2016). Paradigm shift: media ethics in the age of intelligent machines. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.233-247. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Hannes, K. & Parylo, O. (2014). Let’s Play It Safe: Ethical Considerations from Participants in a Photovoice Research Project. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13, pp.255-275. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hardey, M. (2014). Marketing narratives: researching digital data, design and the in/visible consumer. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.115-136. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Harris, A. (2016). The ethics of researching images found online. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.61-73. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Hart-Davidson, W. (2007). Studying the mediated action of composing with time-use diaries. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.153-170. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Hawkes, L. (2007). Impact of invasive web technologies on digital research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.337-351. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Hea, A. K. (2007). Riding the wave: articulating a critical methodology for web research practices. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.269-286. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Helbing, D. (2018). Societal, Economic, Ethical and Legal Challenges of the Digital Revolution: From Big Data to Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, and Manipulative Technologies. Towards Digital Enlightenment (pp.47-72), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Henderson, M., Johnson, N. F. & Auld, G. (2013). Silences of ethical practice: dilemmas for researchers using social media. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(6), pp.546–560. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hestres, L. E. (2016). The emerging ethics of digital political strategists. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.172-185. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Heuva, W. E. (2017). Deferring citizens’ “Right to know” in an information age: the information deficit in Namibia. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.245-267. Information Science Reference (ISR).









39

Hewson, C. (2016). Ethics issues in digital methods research. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.206-221. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Highfield, T. & Leaver, T. (2015). A methodology for mapping Instagram hashtags. First Monday, 20(1), pp.1-11. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hilligoss, S. & Williams, S. (2007). Composition meets visual communication: new research questions. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.229-247. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Hine, C. (2009). How can qualitative internet researchers define the boundaries of their projects? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.1-20. Sage Publications. Hoel, T., Griffiths, D. & Chen, W. (2017). The influence of data protection and privacy frameworks on the design of learning analytics systems. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, pp.243-252. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N. J. & Hillman, A. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people's engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 17(3), pp.360-375. Hope, J. (2016). Mixing modes to widen research participation. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.71-86. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Hoser, B. & Nitschke, T. (2010). Questions on ethics for research in the virtually connected world. Social Networks, 32, pp.180–186. Howell, C., Cox, S., Drew, S., Guillemin, M., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2014). Exploring ethical frontiers of visual methods. Research ethics review, 10(4), pp.208-213. Humphreys, L. (2017). Locating locational data in mobile and social media. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.245-254. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Hutchinson, J., Martin, F. & Sinpeng, A. (2017). Chasing ISIS: network power, distributed ethics and responsible social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.57-71. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Hård af Segerstad, Y., Kasperowski, D., Kullenberg, C. & Howes, C. (2017). Studying closed communities on-line: digital methods and ethical considerations beyond informed consent

http://firstmonday.org/article/view/5563/4195

https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3027414








40

and anonymity. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.213-225. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Jane, E. A. (2015). Flaming? what flaming? the pitfalls and potentials of researching online hostility. Ethics and Information Technology, 17(1), pp.65-87. Kadushin, C. (2005). Who benefits from network analysis: ethics of social network research. Social Networks, 27, pp.139–153. Kamerer, D. (2012). Disclosing material connections online: legal and ethical issues. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.61-79. New York: Peter Lang. Karie, N. & Karume, S. (2017). Digital Forensic Readiness in Organizations: Issues and Challenges. The Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law, 12(4). Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University/Hunt Library. Accessed: 13-09-2019. Kelly, A. R. (2016). Emerging genres of science communication and their ethical exigencies. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.3-18. New York: Peter Lang. Kelly, P., Marshall, S. J., Badland, H., Kerr, J., Oliver, M. & Doherty, A. R. et al. (2013). An Ethical Framework for Automated, Wearable Cameras in Health Behavior Research. American journal of preventive medicine, 44(3), pp.314-319. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Klastrup, L. (2017). Death, affect and the ethical challenges of outing a griefsquatter. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.235-242. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. King, S. A. (1996). Researching Internet Communities: Proposed Ethical Guidelines for the Reporting of Results. The Information Society, 12(2), pp.119-128. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Biometrics. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.359-375. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer crime investigations – computer forensics. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.343-358. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer Crimes. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.239-262. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computerspace and cyberethics. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.283-321. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethics and the professions. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.65-96. London: Springer.


https://commons.erau.edu/jdfsl/vol12/iss4/5/






41

Kizza, J. M. (2007). New frontiers for computer ethics artificial intelligence, cyberspace, and virtual intelligence. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.263-281. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Social context of computing. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.157-199. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Software issues: risks and liabilities. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.201-238. London: Springer. Knox, J. (2016). What’s the matter with MOOCs? Socio-material methodologies for educational research. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.175-189. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Kong, E., Hog, S. C., Gussen, B. F., Turner, J. & Abawi, L. (2019). Strategies on addressing contract cheating: a case study from an Australian regional university. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.176-199. IGI Global. Kosinski, M., Matz, S. C., Gosling, S. D., Popov, V. & Stillwell, D. (2015). Facebook as a research tool for the social sciences: Opportunities, challenges, ethical considerations, and practical guidelines. The American psychologist, 70(6), pp.543-556. Krotoski, A. K. (2012). Data-driven research: open data opportunities for growing knowledge, and ethical issues that arise. Insights - the UKSG Journal, 25(1), pp.28-32. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Krug, M. & Heuser, S. (2018). Ethics in the field: research practice in audio-visual studies. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018. Lando, A. L. (2017). Media-Invented stories and outright lies a threat to journalism ethics and media credibility. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.64-77. Information Science Reference (ISR). Larsen, M. C. & Glud, L. N. (2013). Nye medier, nye metoder, nye etiske udfordringer. Metode & Forskningsdesign, 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Larsson, A. O. (2015). Studying Big Data – ethical and methodological considerations. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.141-156. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Laursen, D., Sandvik, K. & Brügger, N. (2017). Metoder til indsamling af internetmateriale og deres effekt på senere analyser med Facebook som eksempel. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.31-49. Frederiksberg. Samfundslitteratur.






42

Literat, I. & Brough, M. (2019). From Ethical to Equitable Social Media Technologies: Amplifying Underrepresented Youth Voices in Digital Technology Design. Journal of Media Ethics, 34(3) (pp.132-145), Informa UK Limited. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Lodge, C. (2009). About face: Visual research involving children. Education 3-13, 37(4), pp.361-370. Lohmeier, C. (2014). The researcher and the never-ending field: reconsidering big data and digital ethnography. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.75-90. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Luka, M. E., Millette, M. & Wallace, J. (2017). A feminist perspective on ethical digital methods. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.21-36. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lunceford, B. (2016). Programs or people? Participation and the ethics of hacktivism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.77-90. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D. & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical Use of Social Media to Facilitate Qualitative Research. Qualitative health research, 25(1), pp.99-109. Lyon, D. (2016). Researching young people’s orientations to the future: the methodological challenges of using arts practice. Qualitative research, 16(4), pp.430-445. Manderson, L., Davis, M., Colwell, C. & Ahlin, T. (2015). On Secrecy, Disclosure, the Public, and the Private in Anthropology. Current anthropology, 56(S12), pp.183-190. Markham, A. (2016). OKCupid data release fiasco: It’s time to rethink ethics education. Medium. Accessed: 18-06-2018. Markham, A. (2015). Produsing Ethics [for the digital near future]. In Lind, R. (Ed.) (2015). Produsing Theory in a Digital World 2.0: The Intersection of Audiences and Production in Contemporary Theory, 2, pp.247-366. Peter Lang. Digital Formations, (99). Markham, A. N. (2009). How can qualitative researchers produce work that is meaningful across time, space, and culture? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.131-155. Sage Publications. Markham, A. N. (2016). From using to sharing: a story of shifting fault lines in privacy and data protection discourse. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.189-206. New York: Peter Lang. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2015). Internet research: ethical concerns. In Wright, J. (Ed.) (2015). International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Science, 2, pp.606-613. Elsevier Science.







43

Matthiesen, N. & Szulevicz, T. (2018). Mom, Dad, and the Research Object: The Ethics of Conducting Research Based on Your Own Children's Everyday Life. Anthropology and education quarterly, 49(3), pp.329-339. McIntire-Strasburg, J. (2007). Multimedia research: difficult questions with indefinite answers. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.287-300. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. McLeod, K. & Guillemin, M. (2016). The impact of photographs on the researcher: an ethical matter for visual research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.89-100. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Menchen-Trevino, E. (2018). Digital Trace Data and Social Research. In Menchen-Trevino, E. (2018). The Oxford Handbook of Networked Communication, Oxford University Press. Metcalf, J., Boyd, D. & Keller, E. (2016). Perspectives on Big Data, Ethics, and Society. Council for Big Data, Ethics, and Society. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Moats, D. & Perriam, J. (2017). How does it feel to be visualized? In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.255-265. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Mok, T. M., Cornish, F. & Tarr, J. (2015). Too Much Information: Visual Research Ethics in the Age of Wearable Cameras. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral, 49, pp.309–322. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Moreno, M. A., Goniu, N., Moreno, P. S. & Diekema, D. (2013). Ethics of Social Media Research: Common Concerns and Practical Considerations. Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking, 16(9), pp.708-713. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Mudaly, N. (2015). The rights of pre-verbal children involved in video-recorded research. An examination of the ethical issues. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 23, pp.391-404. Mutlu, C. E. (2015). Of algorithms, data and ethics: A response to Andrew Bennett. Millennium, 43(3), pp.998-1002. Nansen, B., Wilken, R., Kennedy, J., Arnold, M. & Gibbs, M. (2016). Methodological and ethical concerns associated with digital ethnography in domestic environments: participant burden and burdensome technologies. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.45-59. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Nebeker, C. (2015). A multi-case study of research using mobile imaging, sensing and tracking technologies to objectively measure behavior: ethical issues and insights to guide responsible research practice. Journal of Research Administration, 46(1), pp.118-137.



https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/077d/c1ce3e27846ecad670ffd2313baaf8603be2.pdf





44

Nissenbaum, H. (2011). A contextual approach to privacy online. Daedalus, 140(4), pp.32-48. Nissenbaum, H. (2015). Respect for context as a benchmark for privacy online: what it is and isn't. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Oboler, A., Welsh, K. & Cruz, L. (2012). The danger of big data: Social media as computational social science. First Monday, 17(7). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Oravec, J. A. (2012). The ethics of sexting: issues involving consent and the production of intimate content. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.129-145. New York: Peter Lang. Orgad, S. (2009). How can researchers make sense of the issues involved in collecting and interpreting online and offline data? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.33-52. Sage Publications. Palys, T. & Atchison, C. (2012). Qualitative Research in the Digital Era: Obstacles and Opportunities. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 11(4), pp.352-367. Pandey, I. (2007). Researching (with) the postnational “other”: ethics, methodologies, and qualitative studies of literacy. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.107-125. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Pascoe, J. C. (2012). Studying young people's new media use: Methodological shifts and educational innovations. Theory into Practice, 51(2), pp.76-82. Pittman, M. & Bivins, T. (2016). Just war craft: virtue ethics and DotA. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.91-106. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Poor, N. (2017). The ethics of using hacked data: Patreon’s data hack and academic data standards. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.277-280. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Pope, C.C., De Luca, R. & Tolich, M. (2010). How an exchange of perspectives led to tentative ethical guidelines for visual ethnography. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), pp.301-315. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Porr, B. W. & Ployhart, E. R. (2004). Organizational Research over the internet: ethical challenges and opportunities. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.130-155. Hershey: Idea Group Inc.








45

Power, K. (2019). Ethical problems in virtual research: Enmeshing the blurriness with Twitter data. E-Learning and Digital Media, 16(3), pp.196-207. SAGE Publications. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Prinsloo, P. & Slade, S. (2017). An elephant in the learning analytics room – the obligation to act. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, pp.46-55. Puurveen, G., Phinney, A., Cox, S. & Purves, B. (2016). Ethical considerations in the use of video observations in dementia end-of-life care research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.105-115. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Ramïrez, G. B. & Palu-ay, L. (2015). "You don't look like your profile picture": The ethical implications of researching online identities in higher education. Educational Research and Evaluation, 21(2), pp.139-153. Reilly, E. (2012). Shaping our shadow. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.117-126. New York: Peter Lang. Rice, J. (2019). Professorial Outrage. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.123-140. New York: Routledge. Rickly, R. (2007). Messy contexts: research as a rhetorical situation. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.377-397. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Rijab, M. S. U. & Mou, N. Z (2019). Ethical issues of qualitative research. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.683-698. IGI Global. Roberts, D. (2017). ‘Getting What They Deserve’: Digital Media Readers Comment on the Cause of Detroit’s Bankruptcy. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.107-110. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Robson, S. (2011). Producing and using video data in the early years: Ethical questions and practical consequences in research with young children. Children & Society, 25(3), pp.179-189. Robson, J. (2017). Participant anonymity and participant observations: situating the researcher within digital ethnography. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.195-202. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Rogers, R. (2016). The harm of video games: the ethics behind regulating minors’ access to violent video games in light of the supreme court ruling. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.216-230. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.






46

Sabao, C. & Chingwaramusee, V. R. (2017). Citizen journalism on Facebook and the challenges of media regulation in Zimbabwe: Baba Jukwa. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.193-206. Information Science Reference (ISR). Sajuria, J. & Fábrega, J. (2016). Do we need polls? Why Twitter will not replace opinion surveys, but can complement them. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.87-104. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Saunders, B., Kitzinger, J. & Kitzinger, C. (2015). Participant Anonymity in the Internet Age: From Theory to Practice. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), pp.125-137. Schweitzer, L. A. & Afzalan, N. (2017). Four Reasons Why AICP Needs an Open Data Ethic. American Planning Association. Journal of the American Planning Association, 83(2), pp.161-167. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Segadal, K. U. (2015). Possibilities and limitations of Internet research: A legal framework. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.35-47. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Shatzer, M. J. & Lindlof, T. R. (1998). Media ethnography in virtual space: Strategies, limits, and possibilities. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42(2), pp.170-189. Shepard, J. M. (2016). The emerging uses of ethical principles in journalist’s privilege law. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.41-62. New York: Peter Lang. Sicart, M. (2012). Instrumental play of the moral risks of gamification. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.210-230. New York: Peter Lang. Sidler, M. (2007). Playing scavenger and gazer with scientific discourse: opportunities and ethics for online research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.71-86. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Sidze, S. M., Köhler, T. & Szarzynski, J. (2017). Ethical Issues in Collecting Data from Informant of the Field. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (Eds.) (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.101-104. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Sin, H. L. (2015). “You're Not Doing Work, You're on Facebook!”: Ethics of Encountering the Field Through Social Media. The Professional geographer, 67(4), pp.676-685. Smith, B. (2007). Researching hybrid literacies: methodological explorations of “ethnography” and the practices of the cybertariat. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.)




47

(2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.127-149. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Smith, R. J. (2014). Missed miracles and mystical connections: qualitative research, digital social science and big data. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.181-204. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Stirling, E. (2016). ‘I’m always on Facebook!’: Exploring Facebook as a mainstream research tool and ethnographic site. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.51-66. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Stroud, S. R. (2016). “Be a bully to beat a bully”: Twitter ethics, online identity, and the culture of quick revenge. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.264-278. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Suomela, T., Chee, F., Berendt, B. & Rockwell, G. (2019). Applying an Ethics of Care to Internet Research: Gamergate and Digital Humanities. Digital Studies/Le champ numérique, 9(1), Open Library of the Humanities. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Sweeney, P. (2017). Images of faces gleaned from social media social psychological research on sexual orientation. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.287-291. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Sylvia IV, J. J. (2016). Little brother: how big data necessitates an ethical shift from privacy to power. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.13-28. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Taylor, L. (2016). The ethics of big data as a public good: which public? Whose good?. Philosophical transactions - Royal Society. Mathematical, Physical and engineering sciences, 374(2083). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Tedder, V. (2016). Digital stories and handmade skills: explorations in how digital methods can be used to study transmissions of skill. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.157-170. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Third, A., Livingstong, S. & Lansdown, G. (2019). Recognizing children’s rights in relation to digital technologies: challenges of voice and evidence, principle and practice. In Wagner, B., Kettemann, M. C. & Vieth, K. (Eds.) (2019). Research Handbook on Human Rights and Digital Technology, pp.376-410. Edward Elgar Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Tilton, S. (2016). “Steve Jobs is dead”: iReport and the ethos of citizen journalism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.138-152. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.









48

Townsend, L. & Wallace, C. (2016). Social media research: A guide to ethics. Accessed: 24-09-2018. Tromble, R. & Stockmann, D. (2017). Lost umbrellas: bias and the right to be forgotten in social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.75-91. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Vaughan, C. (2016). Different lenses: navigating ethics in cross-cultural research using photovoice. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.19-30. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Vayena, E., Haeusermann, T., Adjekum, A. & Blasimme, A. (2018). Digital health: meeting the ethical and policy challenges. Swiss Medical Weekly, 148(34), EMH Swiss Medical Publishers, Ltd. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Völcker, M. & Bruns, A. (2018). Digital self-presentation: the subjective meaning of selfies for adolescents and young adults. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018. Wang, Y. (2016). Big opportunities and big concerns of big data in education. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 60(4), pp.381-384. Warr, D., Waycott, J., Guillemin, M. & Cox, S. (2016). Ethical issues in visual research and the value of stories from the field. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.1-16. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Watley, E. (2016). Race, gender, and digital media: the mis-adventures of awkward black girl and the representations of black female identity. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.248-263. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. E. (2015). Uncovering the challenges in collection, sharing and documentation: The hidden data of social media research?. In AAAI Workshop - Technical Report, pp.28-37. Weller, K. (2014). What do we get from Twitter- and what not? A close look at Twitter research in the social sciences. Knowledge organization, 41(3), pp.238-248. Weller, K. (2015). Accepting the challenges of social media research. Online Information Review, 39(3), pp.281-289. Wengenmeir, M. (2017). Twitter research in the disaster context – ethical concerns for working with historical datasets. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.293-299. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_487729_en.pdf










49

Wildermuth, S. (2016). When privates are public: ethical issues in news media coverage of transgender people. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.202-215. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Wilesa, R., Coffey, A., Robinson, J. & Heath, S. (2012). Anonymisation and visual images: issues of respect, ‘voice’ and protection. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15(1), pp.41–53. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Williams, M. L., Burnap, P., Sloan, L., Jessop, C. & Lepps, H. (2017). Users’ View of Ethics in Social Media Research: Informed Consent, Anonymity and Harm. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.27-52. Wojak, R. (2012). The moral status of grieving. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.146-163. New York: Peter Lang. Wolfgang, J. D. (2016). Opening the marketplace: a case for the protection of anonymous online comments. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.85-103. New York: Peter Lang. Yao-huai, L. (2019). Globalization and information ethics. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.69–73. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 12-09-2019. Zimmer M. (2016). OkCupid Study Reveals the Perils of Big-Data Science. Wired. Accessed: 14-06-2018. Zimmer, M. & Proferes, N. J. (2014). A topology of Twitter research: disciplines, methods, and ethics. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66 (3), pp.250-261. Zwitter, A. (2014). Big Data ethics. Big Data & Society, 1(2). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Önacan, M. B. K., Uluag, M., Önel, T. & Medeni, T. D. (2019). Selection of plagiarism detection software and its integration into Moodle for universities: en example of open source software use in developing countries. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.200-215. IGI Global.







50

CRIMINAL/ FORENSIC CASE STUDIES


51

5. Criminal/forensic case studies The past year has offered new possibilities in the terms of criminal prosecution and crime tracking, mostly thanks to social media and the users who post online or criminals who leave traces online. This category, formerly called Criminal case studies, now embraces research with focus on forensics and the use of social media to prosecute criminals. Researchers specifically focus on the complex question of whether it is ethically correct to collect data from online sources – and if criminals are subject to other rules than non-criminals. At the same time the category still focuses on criminal cases, such as what the implications are of posting mug shots online (Grabowski & Yeng, 2012) and sharing intimate content (Oravec, 2012). Arshad, H., Jantan, A. & Omolara, E. (2019). Evidence collection and forensics on social networks: Research challenges and directions. Digital Investigation, 28 (pp.126-138), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Carey, B. (2012). Permissible piracy? In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.164-177. New York: Peter Lang. Condis, M. (2019). Hateful Games. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.143-159. New York: Routledge. Grabowski, M. & Yeng, S. (2012). To post or not to post: philosophical and ethical considerations for mug shot websites. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.99-116. New York: Peter Lang. Hutchinson, J., Martin, F. & Sinpeng, A. (2017). Chasing ISIS: network power, distributed ethics and responsible social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.57-71. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Karppi, T. (2018). “The Computer Said So”: On the Ethics, Effectiveness, and Cultural Techniques of Predictive Policing. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer Crimes. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.239-262. London: Springer. Lunceford, B. (2016). Programs or people? Participation and the ethics of hacktivism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.77-90. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Mhiripiri, N. A & Chikakano, J. (2017). Criminal defamation, the criminalization of expression, media and information dissemination in the digital age: a legal and ethical perspective. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.1-24. Information Science Reference (ISR).








52

Oravec, J. A. (2012). The ethics of sexting: issues involving consent and the production of intimate content. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.129-145. New York: Peter Lang. Servida, F. & Casey, E. (2019). IoT forensic challenges and opportunities for digital traces. Digital Investigation, 28. Elsevier BV. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Rogers, R. (2016). The harm of video games: the ethics behind regulating minors’ access to violent video games in light of the supreme court ruling. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.216-230. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Wildermuth, S. (2016). When privates are public: ethical issues in news media coverage of transgender people. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.202-215. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.



53

CONSENT


54

6. Consent One of the most debated questions in the masses of academic literature is whether the ethical guidelines available to researchers is outdated or not, and if we can indeed transfer the guidelines onto digital data collections as well. Informed consent often turns out to be one of the big questions when collecting data online, especially how and when to collect informed consent from users of social media, e.g. Twitter, Tinder or Facebook. Casey Fiesler and Nicholas Profores (2018) investigated Twitter-users’ perception of their tweets being used in research, and a majority of the participants in the research felt that researchers should not be able to use tweets without having gained consent from the “tweeter”. Another example of researchers focusing on consent is Elisabeth Staksrud, who has provided us with the article Top ten types of informed consent your supervisor never told you about (2019). In this article, she shares her recollections of collecting informed consent in various scenarios by categorizing them in types, such as: “No. 10 – the “we are too cool for this” consent” and “No. 2 – the “unicorn” consent”. Alim, S. (2014). An initial exploration of ethical research practices regarding automated data extraction from online social media user profiles. First Monday, 19(7). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Andrews, T., Dyson, L. E. & Wishart, J. (2015). Advancing ethics frameworks and scenario-based learning to support educational research into mobile learning. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 38(3), pp.320-334. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Anthony, M. G. & Thomas, R. J. (2016). “The classroom is NOT a sacred space”: revisiting citizen journalism and surveillance in the digital classroom. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.29-43. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Banister, S. (2007). Ethical issues and qualitative methods in the 21st century: how can digital technologies be embraced in the research community? Journal of Ethnographic and Qualitative Research, 1, pp.1-10. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Bechmann, A. (2014). Non-informed consent cultures: privacy policies and app contracts on Facebook. Journal of media business studies, 11(1), pp.21-38. Accessed: 02-10-2018. Bechmann, A. & Vahlstrup, P.B. (2015). Studying Facebook and Instagram data: The digital footprints software. First Monday, 20(12), 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Bennett, L., Chin, B. & Jones, B. (2016). Between ethics, privacy, fandom, and social media: new trajectories that challenge media producer/fan relations. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.107-122. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Blom, R. (2017). Naming crime suspects in the news: “Seek the truth and report it” vs. “Minimizing harm”. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.207-226. Information Science Reference (ISR).





http://edhd.bgsu.edu/~sbanist/portfolio/scholar/jeqr.pdf


https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/16522354.2014.11073574?casa_token=Cto5GnATBUsAAAAA:2cPr_tsn85iurDCXT7G046Az5QJBpDxcLh8p8Z5buD-SQ-Y8kdkjSlAE0XLNjbPKLQQiUc7zD78





55

Bober, M. (2004). Virtual youth research: an exploration of methodologies and ethical dilemmas from a British perspective. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.288-316. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Bruns, A. & Burgess, J. (2016). Methodological innovation in precarious spaces: the case of Twitter. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.17-33. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Brunton, F. & Nissenbaum H. (2013). Political and Ethical Perspectives on Data Obfuscation. In Hildebrandt, M. & de Vries, K. (2013). Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn, pp.164-188. New York: Routledge. Buchanan, E.A. & Zimmer, M. (2013). Internet research ethics. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.) (2013). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Carey, B. (2012). Permissible piracy? In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.164-177. New York: Peter Lang. Carpenter, K. J. & Dittrich, D. (2012). Bridging the distance: Removing the technology buffer and seeking consistent ethical analysis in computer security research. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.39-58. New York: Peter Lang. Clark, D. (2004). What if you meet face to face? A case study in virtual/material research ethics. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.246-261. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Clark, L. S. (2016). The ethics of engagement: considering digital ethics in a critical participatory action research project with urban youth. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.167-187. New York: Peter Lang. Cox, S. M. (2016). From adversaries to allies: ethical review in the context of visual and other innovative methods. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.251-262. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Davisson, A. (2016). Passing around women’s bodies online: identity, privacy, and free speech on Reddit. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.44-57. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Dennen, V. P. (2012). When public words are not data. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.21-38. New York: Peter Lang. Elgesem, D. (2015). Consent and information – ethical considerations when conducting research on social media. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.14-34. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.



56

Elm, M. S. (2009). How do various notions of privacy influence decisions in qualitative internet research? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.69-87. Sage Publications. Ess, C. (2014). Copying and distributing via digital media: copyright, copyleft, global perspectives. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics, 2, pp.84-119. Malden, Mass.: Polity. Eysenbach, G. & Till, J. E. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 323(7321), pp.1103-1105. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Ferguson, R. D. (2017). Negotiating consent, compensation and privacy in internet research. ParentsLikeMe.com as a case study. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.269-275. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Fiesler, C. & Proferes, N. (2018). “Participant” perceptions of twitter research ethics. Social media + society. Accessed: 14-10-2019. Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), pp.553-565. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Flewitt, R. (2019). Ethics and researching young children’s digital literacy practices. In Erstad, O., Flewitt, R., Kümmerling-Meibauer, B. & Periera, I. S. P. (Eds.) (2019). The Routledge Handbook of Digital Literacies in Early Childhood, pp.64-78. London: Routledge. Flick, C. (2015). Informed consent and the Facebook emotional manipulation study. Research ethics, 12(1). Accessed: 14-10-2019. Fuchs, C. (2018). “Dear Mr. Neo-Nazi, Can You Please Give Me Your Informed Consent So That I Can Quote Your Fascist Tweet?“. Questions of Social Media Research Ethics in Online Ideology Critique. In Meikle, G. (Ed.) (2018). The Routledge Companion to Media and Activism, pp.385-394. Abingdon: Routledge. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Gillespie, R. (2016). Freedom, democracy, power, irony: the ethics of information and the networked fourth estate. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.58-73. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Ginnis, S. (2017). Where Next for #SocialEthics? In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.209-236. Grabowski, M. & Yeng, S. (2012). To post or not to post: philosophical and ethical considerations for mug shot websites. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.99-116. New York: Peter Lang. Halford, S. (2017). The Ethical Disruptions of Social Media Data: Tales from the Field. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.13-25.






http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1485334/






57

Hammer, M. J. (2017). Research ethics in big data. Oncology nursing forum, 44(3), pp.293-295. Hancock, J. T. (2019). The Ethics of Digital Research. In Welles, B. F. & González-Bailón, S. (Eds.) (2019). The Oxford Handbook of Networked Communication. London: Oxford University Press. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Hannes, K. & Parylo, O. (2014). Let’s Play It Safe: Ethical Considerations from Participants in a Photovoice Research Project. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13, pp.255-275. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Harris, A. (2016). The ethics of researching images found online. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.61-73. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Hasselbach, G. & Tranberg, P. (2016). Data ethics – the new competitive advantage. Publishare. Hawkes, L. (2007). Impact of invasive web technologies on digital research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.337-351. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Henderson, M., Johnson, N. F. & Auld, G. (2013). Silences of ethical practice: dilemmas for researchers using social media. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(6), pp.546–560. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hård af Segerstad, Y., Kasperowski, D., Kullenberg, C. & Howes, C. (2017). Studying closed communities on-line: digital methods and ethical considerations beyond informed consent and anonymity. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.213-225. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Jadue Roa, D. S. (2017). Ethical issues in listening to young children in visual participatory research. International journal of inclusive education, 21(3), pp.332-345. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Jahun, U. S. (2017). Online and Offline: The Ethical Considerations of Researching the Use of Social Media by Traditional Journalists in Northern Nigerian Newsroom. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (Eds.) (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.129-133. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Kanuka, H. & Anderson, T. (2007). Ethical issues in qualitative e-learning research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. Accessed: 14-10-2019.









http://www.libs.uga.edu/reserves/docs/main-current/roulston-qual8595e/jadue%20roa_ethical%20issues%20in%20listening%20to%20young%20children%20in%20visual%20participatory%20research.pdf




58

Karppi, T. (2018). “The Computer Said So”: On the Ethics, Effectiveness, and Cultural Techniques of Predictive Policing. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Kelly, P., Marshall, S. J., Badland, H., Kerr, J., Oliver, M. & Doherty, A. R. et al. (2013). An Ethical Framework for Automated, Wearable Cameras in Health Behavior Research. American journal of preventive medicine, 44(3), pp.314-319. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethics, technology, and value. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.37-63. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethics and the professions. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.65-96. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Social context of computing. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.157-199. London: Springer. Krishnamurthy, S. (2004). The Ethics of Conducting E-Mail Surveys. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.114-129. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Krotoski, A. K. (2012). Data-driven research: open data opportunities for growing knowledge, and ethical issues that arise. Insights - the UKSG Journal, 25(1), pp.28-32. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Larsen, M. C. & Glud, L. N. (2013). Nye medier, nye metoder, nye etiske udfordringer. Metode & Forskningsdesign, 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Legewie, N. & Nassauer, A. (2018). YouTube, Google, Facebook: 21st century online video research and research ethics. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018. Lie, R. & Witteveen, L. (2017). Visual informed consent: informed consent without forms. International journal of social research methodology, 20(1), pp.63-75. Light, B., Mitchell, P. & Wikström, P. (2018). Big data, method and the ethics of location: a case study of a hookup app for men who have sex with men. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge. Lüders, M. (2015). Researching social media: Confidentiality, anonymity and reconstructing online practices. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.77-97. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Maczewski, M., Storey, M. A. & Hoskins, M. (2004). Conducting Congruent, Ethical, Qualitative Research in Internet Mediated Research Environments. In Buchanan, E. A.













59

(Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.62-79. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Mannay, D. (2016). The politics of visibility, voice and anonymity: ethically disseminating visual research findings without the pictures. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.225-235. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Markham, A. (2016). OKCupid data release fiasco: It’s time to rethink ethics education. Medium. Accessed: 18-06-2018. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2015). Internet research: ethical concerns. In Wright, J. (Ed.) (2015). International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Science, 2, pp.606-613. Elsevier Science. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2017). Research ethics in context: Decision making in digital research. In Schäfer, M. T. & van Es, K. (Eds.) (2017). The Datafied Society: Studying culture through data, pp.201-209. Amsterdam University Press B.V. Martinez-Martin, N., Insel, T. R., Dagum, P., Greely, H. T. & Cho, M. K. (2018). Data mining for health: staking out the ethical territory of digital phenotyping. Npj Digital Medicine, 1(1), Springer Nature. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Matthiesen, N. & Szulevicz, T. (2018). Mom, Dad, and the Research Object: The Ethics of Conducting Research Based on Your Own Children's Everyday Life. Anthropology and education quarterly, 49(3), pp.329-339. McKee, H. A. & Porter, J. E. (2009). The ethics of internet research. A rhetorical, case-based process. New York: Peter Lang. McIntire-Strasburg, J. (2007). Multimedia research: difficult questions with indefinite answers. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.287-300. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Moats, D. & Perriam, J. (2017). How does it feel to be visualized? In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.255-265. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Mok, T. M., Cornish, F. & Tarr, J. (2015). Too Much Information: Visual Research Ethics in the Age of Wearable Cameras. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral, 49, pp.309–322. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Monks, H., Cardoso, P., Papageorgiou, A., Carolan, C., Costello, L. & Thomas, L. (2015). Young people's views regarding participation in mental health and wellbeing research through social media. International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(1), pp.4-19. Accessed: 26-09-2018.










60

Moreno, M. A., Goniu, N., Moreno, P. S. & Diekema, D. (2013). Ethics of Social Media Research: Common Concerns and Practical Considerations. Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking, 16(9), pp.708-713. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Nebeker, C. (2015). A multi-case study of research using mobile imaging, sensing and tracking technologies to objectively measure behavior: ethical issues and insights to guide responsible research practice. Journal of Research Administration, 46(1), pp.118-137. Nissenbaum, H. (2011). A contextual approach to privacy online. Daedalus, 140(4), pp.32-48. Nissenbaum, H. (2015). Respect for context as a benchmark for privacy online: what it is and isn't. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R. & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). E-Research: Ethics, Security, Design, and Control in Psychological Research on the Internet. Journal of social issues, 58(1), pp.161–176. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Oravec, J. A. (2012). The ethics of sexting: issues involving consent and the production of intimate content. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.129-145. New York: Peter Lang. Pascalev, M. (2017). Privacy exchanges: Restoring consent in privacy self-management. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(1), pp.39-48. Pauwels, L. (2006). Ethical Issues of Online (Visual) Research. Visual Anthropology, 19, pp.365–369. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Pentzold, C. (2017). 'What are these researchers doing in my wikipedia?': Ethical premises and practical judgment in internet-based ethnography. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(2), pp.143-155. Pope, C.C., De Luca, R. & Tolich, M. (2010). How an exchange of perspectives led to tentative ethical guidelines for visual ethnography. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), pp.301-315. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Puurveen, G., Phinney, A., Cox, S. & Purves, B. (2016). Ethical considerations in the use of video observations in dementia end-of-life care research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.105-115. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Roberts, J. & Steiner, L. (2012). Ethics of citizen journalism sites. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.80-98. New York: Peter Lang. Roberts, L., Smith, L. & Pollock, C. (2004). Conducting ethical research online: respect for individuals, identities and the ownership of words. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.156-173. Hershey: Idea Group Inc.





https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08949460600656691?casa_token=V6JXT26-fwEAAAAA:gwfpa-8L0ClPLXMcXbcQnQR0_huJ5VSsyX1V5ZR6qbzbRigvaXzaw3QOlVMSdia8pU97GekKRbk




61

Robson, S. (2011). Producing and using video data in the early years: Ethical questions and practical consequences in research with young children. Children & Society, 25(3), pp.179-189. Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies: an introduction to researching with visual materials, pp.357-370. London: Sage Publications. Salmons, J. (2017). Getting to Yes: Informed Consent in Qualitative Social Media Research. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.109 -134. Saunders, B., Kitzinger, J. & Kitzinger, C. (2015). Participant Anonymity in the Internet Age: From Theory to Practice. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), pp.125-137. Segadal, K. U. (2015). Possibilities and limitations of Internet research: A legal framework. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.35-47. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Stern, R. S. (2004). Studying adolescents online: a consideration of ethical issues. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.274-287. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Sidze, S. M., Köhler, T. & Szarzynski, J. (2017). Ethical Issues in Collecting Data from Informant of the Field. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (Eds.) (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.101-104. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Steeves, V. (2017). Terra cognita: surveillance of young people’s favourite websites. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.174-186. Stevens, G., O'Donnell, V. L. & Williams, L. (2015). Public domain or private data? Developing an ethical approach to social media research in an inter-disciplinary project. Educational research and evaluation, 21(2), pp.154-167. Sugiura, L., Wiles, R. & Pope, C. (2016). Ethical challenges in online research: Public/private perceptions. Research Ethics, 13(3-4). Accessed: 14-10-2019. Sylvia IV, J. J. (2016). Little brother: how big data necessitates an ethical shift from privacy to power. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.13-28. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Whiteman, N. (2012). Undoing ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York: Springer. Williams, M. L., Burnap, P., Sloan, L., Jessop, C. & Lepps, H. (2017). Users’ View of Ethics in Social Media Research: Informed Consent, Anonymity and Harm. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.27-52.




62

Wolfgang, J. D. (2016). Opening the marketplace: a case for the protection of anonymous online comments. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.85-103. New York: Peter Lang. Wyatt, S. (2012). Ethics of e-Research in social sciences and humanities. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.5-20. New York: Peter Lang. Zimmer M. (2016). OkCupid Study Reveals the Perils of Big-Data Science. Wired. Accessed: 14-06-2018. Zimmer, M. (2018). Addressing conceptual gaps in big data research ethics: an application of contextual integrity. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.





63

ECONOMY


64

7. Economy One of the newest additions to the categories in this collection of ethical research is Economy. Past years have proven that we are becoming even more digitalized than ever, which can also be said for our economy. As our economy becomes digitalized, we need to ask ourselves what ethical challenges may arise, not only in a research perspective but also in our societies. Authors Guryanova, Korotaeva and Chedzhemov (2018) argue, that our society will undergo a massive change if we allow everything to become digitalized, but especially the economy can have ethical challenges: a reduction of jobs, moral norms may change, our boundaries of confidentiality may be altered, rising inequality in wages and much more (Gyruanova, et. al., 2018). Learn more in this category about authors that have investigated the ethical complications that may arise from the digitalization of our society. Guryanova, A.V. (2019). Digital Economy As A Social Phenomenon: Ethical Challenges And Perspectives Of Development. Cognitive-Crcs. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Guryanova, A. V., Smotrova, I. V., Makhovikov, A. E. & Koychubaev, A. S. (2019). Socio-ethical Problems of the Digital Economy: Challenges and Risks. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (pp.96-102), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019.

Helbing, Dirk (2018). Societal, Economic, Ethical and Legal Challenges of the Digital Revolution: From Big Data to Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, and Manipulative Technologies. Towards Digital Enlightenment (pp.47-72), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 04-09-2019.

Pangestu, M. & Dewi, G. (2017). 13. Indonesia and the digital economy: creative destruction, opportunities and challenges. In Edwin Jurriens (Ed.) (2017). Digital Indonesia: Connectivity and Divergence, pp. 227–255. Singapore: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute Singapore.

Riedel, J. (2017). Research Ethics in the Doctoral Project “Boundary Management in Social Media Communication”. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.153-156. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

https://www.futureacademy.org.uk/files/images/upload/GCPMED%202018F027.pdf








65

EDUCATIONAL STUDIES


66

8. Educational studies Virtual classrooms are becoming increasingly popular and sought after, due to their accessibility and versatile nature, which also makes it an interesting field of research. Researchers in this category have found that digital realms make it possible to develop simulations to help teach (Falconer, 2015) and survey the educator and educated (Anthony & Thomas, 2016). Other researchers have focused on teaching in higher education (Gachago & Sykes, 2017) and what ethical implications occur in digital based learning (Kergel, 2017). Anthony, M. G. & Thomas, R. J. (2016). “The classroom is NOT a sacred space”: revisiting citizen journalism and surveillance in the digital classroom. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.29-43. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Butakov, S., Schherbinin, V., Diagilev, V. & Tskhay, A. (2019). Embedding plagiarism detection mechanisms into learning management systems. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.216-231. IGI Global. Falconer, L. (2013). Situated learning in virtual simulations: Researching the authentic dimension in virtual worlds. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 24(3), pp.285-300. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Gachago, D. & Sykes, P. (2017). Navigating Ethical Boundaries When Adopting Digital Storytelling in Higher Education. In Jamissen, G., Hardy, P., Nordkvelle, Y. & Pleasants, H. (Eds.) (2017). Digital Storytelling in Higher Education, pp.91-106. Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 29-10-2019. Hoel, T., Griffiths, D. & Chen, W. (2017). The influence of data protection and privacy frameworks on the design of learning analytics systems. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, pp.243-252. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Kanuka, H. & Anderson, T. (2007). Ethical issues in qualitative e-learning research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. Accessed: 14-10-2019. Kergel, D. (2017). The Postmodern Dialogue and the Ethics of Digital Based Learning. In Kergel, D., Heidkamp, B., Telléus, P. K., Rachwal, T. & Nowakowski, S. (Eds.) (2017). The Digital Turn in Higher Education, pp.47-57. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Khan, Z. R. (2019). What category are they anyway? Proposing a new taxonomy for factors that may influence students’ likelihood to E-cheat. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.148-175. IGI Global. Kong, E., Hog, S. C., Gussen, B. F., Turner, J. & Abawi, L. (2019). Strategies on addressing contract cheating: a case study from an Australian regional university. In Information









67

resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.176-199. IGI Global. Lodge, C. (2009). About face: Visual research involving children. Education 3-13, 37(4), pp.361-370. Oakley, R. L. & Singh, R. (2019). Examining ethical decision making behavior in E-Learning systems: a socio-technical analysis. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.52-68. IGI Global. Prinsloo, P. & Slade, S. (2017). An elephant in the learning analytics room – the obligation to act. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, pp.46-55. Rickly, R. (2007). Messy contexts: research as a rhetorical situation. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.377-397. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Selwyn, N. (2002). Telling tales on technology: the ethical dilemmas of critically researching educational computing. In Welland, T. & Pugsley, L. (Eds.) (2002). Ethical dilemmas in qualitative research. London: Ashgate. Wang, Y. (2016). Big opportunities and big concerns of big data in education. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 60(4), pp.381-384. Zenkov, K., Ewaida, M., Lynch, M. R., Bell, A., Harmon, J., Pellegrino, A. & Sell, C. (2014). Shooting back and "looking for life" in the USA and Haiti: "seeing" the ethics of visual research methods through a development lens. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 37(1), pp.63-86. Önacan, M. B. K., Uluag, M., Önel, T. & Medeni, T. D. (2019). Selection of plagiarism detection software and its integration into Moodle for universities: en example of open source software use in developing countries. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.200-215. IGI Global.


68

ETHICS IN JOURNALISM


69

9. Ethics in Journalism Many traditional fields of employment are suffering because of the explosion of social media and the digital technologies now available. Journalism is no exception: now we can all become authors, or investigative journalists, simply by adding a text on Wikipedia. Though there is a humongous difference between gaining your journalism-diploma and being a Wikipedia-editor or fulltime blogger, these differences may not be visible to the public. The literature in this category focuses on journalism, its development over the past decade, how the trade has adapted to technological changes and what it means to share the title “journalist” with the public. Anthony, M. G. & Thomas, R. J. (2016). “The classroom is NOT a sacred space”: revisiting citizen journalism and surveillance in the digital classroom. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.29-43. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Assay, B. E. (2017). Intellectual property rights and the protection of Africa’s traditional knowledge. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.25-43. Information Science Reference (ISR). Bishop, J. (2017). Overcoming the legal challenges of news reporting: a case study of a start-up news. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.146-163. Information Science Reference (ISR). Blom, R. (2017). Naming crime suspects in the news: “Seek the truth and report it” vs. “Minimizing harm”. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.207-226. Information Science Reference (ISR). Bugeja, M. (2018). Living media ethics – across platforms. Routledge. Culver, K. B. & Mirer, M. (2016). Constrained independence: digital branded content in sports through the lens of journalism ethics. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.19-39. New York: Peter Lang. Cutbirth, J. (2016). Cash out: philanthropy, sustainability, and ethics in nonprofit news. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.186-201. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Dieterle, B., Edwards, D. & Martin, P. D. (2019). Confronting Digital Aggression with an Ethics of Circulation. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.197-213. New York: Routledge. Dube, B. (2017). To lie or not to lie: interrogating codes of conduct on photo ethics in the era of digital technologies. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.44-63. Information Science Reference (ISR). Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). A New Paradigm for News. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.11-36. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


70

Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Deception in Sourcing and Presentation. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.136-153. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). DOIT, A Process for Normative Analysis. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.89-103. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Intellectual Property and Information Sharing. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.64-75. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Issues in Convergent Journalism. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.104-115. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Legacy News Organizations Move from Analog to Digital. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.37-63. John Wiley & Sons. Accessed: 12-09-2019. Elliot, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Media Corruption. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.154-169. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Fayoyin, A. (2017). Electoral polling and reporting in Africa: professional and policy implications for media practice and political communication in a digital age. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.164-181. Information Science Reference (ISR). Grabowski, M. & Yeng, S. (2012). To post or not to post: philosophical and ethical considerations for mug shot websites. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.99-116. New York: Peter Lang. Jahun, U. S. (2017). Online and Offline: The Ethical Considerations of Researching the Use of Social Media by Traditional Journalists in Northern Nigerian Newsroom. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (Eds.) (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.129-133. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Kamerer, D. (2012). Disclosing material connections online: legal and ethical issues. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.61-79. New York: Peter Lang. Knox, J. (2016). What’s the matter with MOOCs? Socio-material methodologies for educational research. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.175-189. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Kunock, A. I. (2017). Boko Haram insurgency in Cameron: role of mass media in conflict management. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.226-244. Information Science Reference (ISR).



71

Lando, A. L. (2017). Media-Invented stories and outright lies a threat to journalism ethics and media credibility. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.64-77. Information Science Reference (ISR). Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge. Neilson, T. (2018). Digital Media, Conventional Methods: Using Video Interviews to Study the Labor of Digital Journalism. In Levenberg, L., Neilsen, T. & Rheams, D. (Eds.) (2018). Research Methods for the Digital Humanities, pp.151-171. Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 09-09-2019. Nenadic, I. (2017). Journalists on Twitter: Reconfiguring Professional Identity, Reconsidering Research Ethics – The Case of Croatia. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.111-117. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Pentzold, C. (2017). 'What are these researchers doing in my wikipedia?': Ethical premises and practical judgment in internet-based ethnography. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(2), pp.143-155. Popoola, T. (2017). Ethical and legal challenges of election reporting in Nigeria - a study of four general elections, 1999-2011. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.78-100. Information Science Reference (ISR). Roberts, J. & Steiner, L. (2012). Ethics of citizen journalism sites. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.80-98. New York: Peter Lang. Sabao, C. & Chingwaramusee, V. R. (2017). Citizen journalism on Facebook and the challenges of media regulation in Zimbabwe: Baba Jukwa. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.193-206. Information Science Reference (ISR). Semujju, B. (2017). Digital media in Uganda: where regulation and freedom of expression contradictions are sharpest. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.182-192. Information Science Reference (ISR). Shepard, J. M. (2016). The emerging uses of ethical principles in journalist’s privilege law. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.41-62. New York: Peter Lang. Tilton, S. (2016). “Steve Jobs is dead”: iReport and the ethos of citizen journalism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.138-152. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Wildermuth, S. (2016). When privates are public: ethical issues in news media coverage of transgender people. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.202-215. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.




72


73

ETHICS IN POLITICS AND LEGISLATION


74

10. Ethics in politics and legislation How do we protect others and ourselves in a world where the digital realm is much vaster than our physical world? Can we simply “transfer” our law-system onto the digital world? How do we protect our data and participants? These are but some of the questions asked by the researchers in this category. Anne Lauber-Rönsberg (2017) investigates the fundamental principles of data protection laws in social sciences, whereas Jonathon Hutchinson (2017) has researched responsible social media research when chasing ISIS, while others investigate the ethical challenges of election reporting in Nigeria (Popoola, 2017). Akpojivi, U. (2017). Rethinking information privacy in a “connected” world. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.268-285. Information Science Reference (ISR). Assay, B. E. (2017). Intellectual property rights and the protection of Africa’s traditional knowledge. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.25-43. Information Science Reference (ISR). Bruns, A. & Burgess, J. (2016). Methodological innovation in precarious spaces: the case of Twitter. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.17-33. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Cortez, N. (2018). The Evolving Law and Ethics of Digital Health. In Rivas, H. & Wac, K. (2018). Digital Health – Scaling Healthcare to the World, pp.249-269. Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Fayoyin, A. (2017). Electoral polling and reporting in Africa: professional and policy implications for media practice and political communication in a digital age. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.164-181. Information Science Reference (ISR). Frankel, M. S. & Siang, S. (1999). Ethical and Legal Aspects of Human Subjects Research on the Internet. American Association for the Advancement of Science. New York: Washington. Gekker, A. (2012). Legionnaries of chaos: “anonymous” and governmental oversight of the internet. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.178-192. New York: Peter Lang. Gil de Zúñiga, H. & Diehl, T. (2017). Citizenship, Social Media, and Big Data. Social science computer review, 35(1), pp.3-9. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Gillespie, R. (2016). Freedom, democracy, power, irony: the ethics of information and the networked fourth estate. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.58-73. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268296040_Ethical_and_Legal_Aspects_of_Human_Subjects_Research_on_the_Internet

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268296040_Ethical_and_Legal_Aspects_of_Human_Subjects_Research_on_the_Internet



75

Hamelink, C. J. (2000). The Ethics of Cyberspace. London: Sage Publications. Hestres, L. E. (2016). The emerging ethics of digital political strategists. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.172-185. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Heuva, W. E. (2017). Deferring citizens’ “Right to know” in an information age: the information deficit in Namibia. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.245-267. Information Science Reference (ISR). Hutchinson, J., Martin, F.& Sinpeng, A. (2017). Chasing ISIS: network power, distributed ethics and responsible social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.57-71. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lauber-Rönsberg, A. (2017). Data Protection Laws, Research Ethics and Social Sciences. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.29-44. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Lunceford, B. (2016). Programs or people? Participation and the ethics of hacktivism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.77-90. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Mascord, D. (2019). Law and ethics. In Hogarth, M. (2019). Writing Feature Articles - Print, Digital and Online, pp.252-260. London: Routledge. Mhiripiri, N. A & Chikakano, J. (2017). Criminal defamation, the criminalization of expression, media and information dissemination in the digital age: a legal and ethical perspective. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.1-24. Information Science Reference (ISR). Nissenbaum, H. (2009). Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Popoola, T. (2017). Ethical and legal challenges of election reporting in Nigeria - a study of four general elections, 1999-2011. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.78-100. Information Science Reference (ISR). Sajuria, J. & Fábrega, J. (2016). Do we need polls? Why Twitter will not replace opinion surveys, but can complement them. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.87-104. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Semujju, B. (2017). Digital media in Uganda: where regulation and freedom of expression contradictions are sharpest. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.182-192. Information Science Reference (ISR).




76

ETHICS IN RELATION TO BUSINESSES AND COMPANIES


77

11. Ethics in relation to businesses and companies Cybercrimes are becoming an increasing threat to companies and as a result, companies and organizations now need to rethink how to operate digitally and how to prepare themselves for (almost) inevitable cyberattacks. Nickson menza Karie and Simon Maina Karume (2017) have investigated the digital forensic readiness that organizations develop to ensure “readiness” for potential cyberattacks, and what ethical implications and challenges that may arise when developing such strategies. Other researchers in this category, such as Omer Tene and Jules Polontesky (2013), have investigated the “creepy” that goes hand in hand with surveillance, social listening, personalized analytics, data-driven marketing and new product launches. This article also gives you an idea of “how to avoid the creep” (Tene & Polonetsky, 2013, pp.82-99). Amazeen, M. A. & O’Sullivan-Gavin, S. (2016). “Rogue” advertising in the digital age: creative reputation building or industry irresponsibility? In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.123-137. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Bandonis, M. & Booth, P. (2016). Branding feminism: corporate blogging and the shaky relationship between ideology and profitability. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.279-294. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Bishop, L. & Gray, D. (2017). Ethical Challenges of Publishing and Sharing Social Media Research Data. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.159-187. Busch, T. (2016). Corporate responsibility in the videogames industry: mapping the territory. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.63-81. New York: Peter Lang. Ford, S. (2016). Perfectly “compliant”: the devaluation of ethics in corporate communication industry discourse. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.155-171. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Hardey, M. (2014). Marketing narratives: researching digital data, design and the in/visible consumer. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.115-136. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Hasselbach, G. & Tranberg, P. (2016). Data ethics – the new competitive advantage. Publishare. Karie, N. & Karume, S. (2017). Digital Forensic Readiness in Organizations: Issues and Challenges. The Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law, 12(4). Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University/Hunt Library. Accessed: 13-09-2019. Levine, L. (2019). Digital Trust and Cooperation with an Integrative Digital Social Contract. Journal of Business Ethics. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. Accessed: 03-09-2019.



https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10551-019-04201-z


78

Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge. Martens, S. (2017). Contracts for the Supply of Digital Content – Consequential Loss. In Schulze, R., Staudenmayer, D. & Lohsse, S. (Eds.). (2017). Contracts for the Supply of Digital Content: Regulatory Challenges and Gaps, pp.155-168. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG. Mullins, M. & Doyle, E. (2010). Establishing a research ethics committee in a business school: a chairperson’s perspective. Research ethics, 6(4). Riedel, J. (2017). Research Ethics in the Doctoral Project “Boundary Management in Social Media Communication”. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.153-156. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Tene, O. & Polonetsky, J. (2013). The theory of Creepy: Technology, Privacy and Shifting Social Norms. Yale JL & Tech. 16(59). Accessed: 26-09-2018.



https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.dk/&httpsredir=1&article=1098&context=yjolt



79

ETHICS IN RELATION TO CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS


80

12. Ethics in relation to children and adolescents Researchers in this category have researched a multitude of ways to obtain data using children and adolescents. Some investigate the ethical implications of collecting data from children and how to ensure their collaboration (Barker & Weller, 2003) while others focus on which challenges researchers can encounter (Aarsand, 2016). Amaia Eskisanel-Azpiazu and her co-authors investigate a specific case in which an 18-year-old student committed suicide after live-tweeting for six hours about the abuse she had been suffering (Eskisabel-Azpiazu et. al., 2017). The good, the bad, the exciting and the sad: this category contains all forms of literature about how to use data derived from children and adolescents, how they are affected by social media, their use of social media and technology, and much more. Pål Aarsand (2010/2016), Charles Ess (2014), Jette Kofoed & Dorthe Staunæs (2015), and Louise Yung Nielsen and Malene Charlotte Larsen (2018) are examples of researchers who have studied how to ethically research with children and adolescents. Aarsand, P. (2016). Children’s media practices: challenges and dilemmas for the qualitative researcher. Journal of Children and Media, 10 (1), pp.90-97. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Aarsand, P. & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing children's corporeal privacy: ethnographic video recording as material-discursive practice. Qualitative research, 10(2), pp.249-268. Alderson P. (2004). Ethics. In Fraser A., Lewis, V., Ding, S., Kellett, M. & Robinson, C. (Eds.) (2004). Doing Research with Children and Young People, pp.97-111. London: Sage Publications. Balmer, C., Griffiths, F. & Dunn, J. (2015). A review of the issues and challenges involved in using participant-produced photographs in nursing research. Journal of advanced nursing, 71(7), pp.1726-1737. Barker, J. & Weller, S. (2003). “Is it fun?” Developing children centered research methods. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23(1/2), pp.33–58. Blair, K. & Tulley, C. (2007). Whose research is it, anyway?: the challenge of developing feminist methodology in technological spaces. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.303-317. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Bober, M. (2004). Virtual youth research: an exploration of methodologies and ethical dilemmas from a British perspective. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.288-316. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Bond, E. & Agnew, S. (2016). Towards an Innovative Inclusion: Using Digital Methods with Young People. In Snee, H., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science, pp.190-205, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Bøge, A. R. (2017). Review of Taylor and Rooney’s Surveillance Futures: Social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. Surveillance and society, 15(5), pp.701-703.




81

Clark, A. (2011). Breaking methodological boundaries? Exploring visual, participatory methods with adults and young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), pp.321-330. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Cook, T. & Hess, E. (2007). “What the camera sees and from whose perspective: Fun methodologies for engaging children in enlightening adults”. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 14(1), pp.29-45. Cutter-Mackenzie, A., Edwards, S. & Quinton, H.W. (2015). Childframed video research methodologies: issues, possibilities and challenges for researching with children. Children's Geographies, 13(3), pp.343-356. Eckhoff, A. (2015). Ethical considerations of children's digital image-making and image-audiancing in early childhood environments. Early Child Development and Care, 185(10), pp.1617-1628. Edmonds, F., Evans, M., McQuire, S. & Chenhall, R. (2016). Ethical considerations when using visual methods in digital storytelling with aboriginal young people in Southeast Australia. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.171-184. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Eskisabel-Azpiazu, A., Cerezo-Menéndez, R. & Gayo-Avello, D. (2017). An ethical inquiry into youth suicide prevention using social media mining. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.227-234. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Ess, C. (2014). Central issues in the ethics of Digital Media. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics, 2, pp.1-34. Malden, Mass.: Polity. Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), pp.553-565. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Flewitt, R. (2019). Ethics and researching young children’s digital literacy practices. In Erstad, O., Flewitt, R., Kümmerling-Meibauer, B. & Periera, I. S. P. (Eds.) (2019). The Routledge Handbook of Digital Literacies in Early Childhood, pp.64-78. London: Routledge. Flicker, S., Haans, D. & Skinner, H. (2012). Ethical Dilemmas in Research on Internet Communities. In Hughes, J. (Eds.) (2012). Sage Library of Research Methods: SAGE internet research methods, pp.221-232. London: Sage. Gard, M. & Lupton, D. (2017). Digital health goes to school: implications of digitising children’s bodies. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.36-49.







82

Gelinas, L. & Kesselheim, J. C. (2018). Social media and pediatric research recruitment. (2018). In Kodish, E. & Nelson, R. M. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics and research with children: a case-based approach (2 ed.). Oxford University Press. Giesinger, J. (2019). Vulnerability and autonomy – children and adults. Ethics and social welfare, 13(3), pp.215-229. Accessed: 09-12-2019. Graham, A. & Powell, M. A. (2015). Ethical Research Involving Children: Encouraging Reflexive Engagement in Research with Children and Young People. Children & Society, 29, pp.331-343. Gubrium, A., Fiddian-Green, A. & Hill, A. (2016). Conflicting aims and minimizing harm: uncovering experiences of trauma in digital storytelling with young women. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.157-170. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Henderson, M., Johnson, N. F. & Auld, G. (2013). Silences of ethical practice: dilemmas for researchers using social media. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(6), pp.546–560. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N. J. & Hillman, A. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people's engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 17(3), pp.360-375. Hope, A. (2017). World of Spycraft: video games, gamification and surveillance creep. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.162-173. Hultman, K. & Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 23(5), pp.525-542. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Jadue Roa, D. S. (2017). Ethical issues in listening to young children in visual participatory research. International journal of inclusive education, 21(3), pp.332-345. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Johansen, S. L. & Larsen, M. C. (2019). Børn, unge og medier. Samfundslitteratur. Johansen, S. L. & Larsen, M. C. (2020). Undersøgelser af børn, unge og medier. Samfundslitteratur. Kort og præcist om medier og kommunikation. Khoja, N. (2016). Situating Children’s Voices: Considering the Context When Conducting Research with Young Children. Children & Society, 30, pp.314-322. Kofoed, J. & Staunæs, D. (2015). Hesitancy as ethics. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Methodology, 6(1), pp.24-39.









83

Larsen, M. C. & Glud, L. N. (2013). Nye medier, nye metoder, nye etiske udfordringer. Metode & Forskningsdesign, 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Lee, M. & Crofts, T. (2017). Sexting and young people: surveillance and childhood sexuality. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.81-92. Lindgren, A. (2012). Ethical issues in pedagogical documentation: Representations of children through digital technology. International Journal of Early Childhood, 44(3), pp.327-340. Literat, I. & Brough, M. (2019). From Ethical to Equitable Social Media Technologies: Amplifying Underrepresented Youth Voices in Digital Technology Design. Journal of Media Ethics, 34(3) (pp.132-145), Informa UK Limited. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Lodge, C. (2009). About face: Visual research involving children. Education 3-13, 37(4), pp.361-370. Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D. & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical use of social media to facilitate qualitative research. Qualitative health research, 25(1), pp.99-109. Lyon, D. (2016). Researching young people’s orientations to the future: the methodological challenges of using arts practice. Qualitative research, 16(4), pp.430-445. Matthiesen, N. & Szulevicz, T. (2018). Mom, Dad, and the Research Object: The Ethics of Conducting Research Based on Your Own Children's Everyday Life. Anthropology and education quarterly, 49(3), pp.329-339. Monks, H., Cardoso, P., Papageorgiou, A., Carolan, C., Costello, L. & Thomas, L. (2015). Young people's views regarding participation in mental health and wellbeing research through social media. International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(1), pp.4-19. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Mudaly, N. (2015). The rights of pre-verbal children involved in video-recorded research. An examination of the ethical issues. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 23, pp.391-404. Nielsen, L. Y. & Larsen, M. C. (2018). Metodiske tilgange til digital ungdomsforskning: Refleksioner over forskning i unges brug af weblogs og fotodelingsapplikationen Snapchat. I Pless, M. & Sørensen, N. U. (Red.). Ungeperspektiver: Tænkninger og tilgange i ungdomsforskningen, 7, pp.173-195. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Ungdomsliv. Nutbrown, C. (2011). Naked by the pool? blurring the image? ethical issues in the portrayal of young children in arts-based educational research. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(1), pp.3-14.







84

Palaiologou, I. (2014). "Do we hear what children want to say?'' Ethical praxis when choosing research tools with children under five. Early Child Development and Care, 184(5), pp.689-705. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Pascoe, J. C. (2012). Studying young people's new media use: Methodological shifts and educational innovations. Theory into Practice, 51(2), pp.76-82. Phelan, S. K. & Kinsella, E. A. (2013). Picture This . . . Safety, Dignity, and Voice— Ethical Research With Children: Practical Considerations for the Reflexive Researcher. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(2), pp.81–90. Rasmussen, K. (2017). Det foto-eliciterede interview. I Kampmann, J., Rasmussen, K. & Warming, H. (Red.) (2017). Interview med børn. Hans Reitzels Forlag. Reilly, E. (2012). Shaping our shadow. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.117-126. New York: Peter Lang. Robson, S. (2011). Producing and using video data in the early years: Ethical questions and practical consequences in research with young children. Children & Society, 25(3), pp.179-189. Rogers, R. (2016). The harm of video games: the ethics behind regulating minors’ access to violent video games in light of the supreme court ruling. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.216-230. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Rogers, R., Labadie, M. & Pole, K. (2016). Balancing voice and protection in literacy studies with young children. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 16(1), pp.34-59. Rooney, T. (2017). Spy kids too: encounters with surveillance through games and play. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.149-161. Schuck, S. & Kearney, M. (2006). Using digital video as a research tool: Ethical issues for researchers. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(4), pp.447-463. Sparks, H., Collins, F. L. & Kearns, R. (2016). Reflecting on the risks and ethical dilemmas of digital research. Geoforum, 77, pp.40-46. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Staksrud, E. (2015). Counting children. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.98-121. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Staksrud, E. (2019) Top ten types of informed consent your supervisor never told you about. Journal of Children and Media, 13:4, 490-493. Accessed: 28-10-2019. Steeves, V. (2017). Terra cognita: surveillance of young people’s favourite websites. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.174-186.





https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/17482798.2019.1669298?needAccess=true



85

Stern, R. S. (2004). Studying adolescents online: a consideration of ethical issues. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.274-287. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Taylor, E. & Rooney, R. (2017). Digital playgrounds: growing up in the surveillance age. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.1-16. Third, A., Livingstong, S. & Lansdown, G. (2019). Recognizing children’s rights in relation to digital technologies: challenges of voice and evidence, principle and practice. In Wagner, B., Kettemann, M. C. & Vieth, K. (Eds.) (2019). Research Handbook on Human Rights and Digital Technology, pp.376-410. Edward Elgar Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Todd, S. (2010). The ethics of marketing to children. In Marshall, D. (2010). Understanding children as consumers. SAGE. Torres, J. R. F. & Warr, D. (2016). Using visual research methods to explore first-person accounts of suicide behavior. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.141-155. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Van Brakel, R. (2017). Rise of pre-emptive surveillance: unintended social and ethical consequences. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.187-199. Völcker, M. & Bruns, A. (2018). Digital self-presentation: the subjective meaning of selfies for adolescents and young adults. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018. Waters, P. & Waite, S. (2016). Toward an ecological approach to ethics in visual research methods with children. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.117-127. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Williamson, B. (2017). Calculating children in the dataveillance school: personal and learning analytics. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.50-66. Yang, K. H. (2015). Voice, authenticity and ethical challenges: the participatory dissemination of youth-generated visual data over social media. Visual studies, 30(3), pp.309-318. Zenkov, K., Ewaida, M., Lynch, M. R., Bell, A., Harmon, J., Pellegrino, A. & Sell, C. (2014). Shooting back and "looking for life" in the USA and Haiti: "seeing" the ethics of visual research methods through a development lens. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 37(1), pp.63-86.






86


87

ETHICS IN SOCIAL RELATIONS


88

13. Ethics in social relations Being social can mean many things – online communities now enable us to make new relationships across borders and social media keeps us in touch with friends, relatives, colleagues and potential employers. We can portray ourselves how we see fit and our relationships can be whatever we want them to be. Researchers in this category have researched what it means to be social in a digital age and what ethical implications may arise when collecting data digitally. The areas include digital classroom surveillance (Anthony & Thomas, 2016), location-aware social networks (Condie, et. al., (2017), being tagged on social media (Frosh, 2018), virtual strangers (Introna, 2019), and many more interesting fields. Albrechtslund, A. (2008). Online social networking as participatory surveillance. First Monday, 13(3). Accessed: 02-10-2018. Alcántara, H. (2019). Collective construction of identity in the internet: ethical dimension and intercultural perspective. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.229–241. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 29-10-2019. Anthony, M. G. & Thomas, R. J. (2016). “The classroom is NOT a sacred space”: revisiting citizen journalism and surveillance in the digital classroom. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.29-43. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Bakioǧlu, B. S. (2016). When the inmates run the asylum: grief play in the virtual panopticon of second life. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.141-163. New York: Peter Lang. Bandonis, M. & Booth, P. (2016). Branding feminism: corporate blogging and the shaky relationship between ideology and profitability. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.279-294. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Bassett, E. H. & O’Riordan, K. (2002). Ethics of Internet Research: Contesting the Human Subjects Research Model. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.233-247. Beavers, A. F. (2012). Could and should the ought disappear from ethics? In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.197-209. New York: Peter Lang. Béranger, J. (2018). Ethics at the Service of Digital Technology. In Béranger, J. (2018). The Algorithmic Code of Ethics - Ethics at the Bedside of the Digital Revolution, pp.55-120. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Beyi, W. A. (2018). The Trilogy of a Digital Communication between the Real Man, his Digital Individual and the Market of the Digital Economy. SocioEconomic Challenges, 2(2) (pp.66-74), Sumy State University. Accessed: 05-09-2019.




http://armgpublishing.sumdu.edu.ua/journals/sec/volume-2-issue-2/article-8/



89

Bishop, L. & Gray, D. (2017). Ethical Challenges of Publishing and Sharing Social Media Research Data. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.159-187. Bruns, A. & Burgess, J. (2016). Methodological innovation in precarious spaces: the case of Twitter. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.17-33. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Burkell, J. A. (2016). Remembering me: Big data, individual identity, and the psychological necessity of forgetting. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(1). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Burnett, J., Chandler, S. & Lopez, J. (2007). A report from the digital contact zone: collaborative research and the hybridizing of cultural mindsets. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.319-336. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press Carlson, C. R. (2016). Hashtags and hate speech: the legal and ethical responsibilities of social media companies to manage content online. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.123-140. New York: Peter Lang. Condie, J., Lean, G. & Wilcockson, B. (2017). The Trouble with Tinder: The Ethical Complexities of Researching Location-Aware Social Discovery Apps. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.135-158. Culver, K. B. & Mirer, M. (2016). Constrained independence: digital branded content in sports through the lens of journalism ethics. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.19-39. New York: Peter Lang. Cutbirth, J. (2016). Cash out: philanthropy, sustainability, and ethics in nonprofit news. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.186-201. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Davisson, A. (2016). Passing around women’s bodies online: identity, privacy, and free speech on Reddit. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.44-57. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Dennen, V. P. (2012). When public words are not data. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.21-38. New York: Peter Lang. Dickens, L. & Butcher, M. (2016). Going public? Re-thinking visibility, ethics and recognition through participatory research praxis. Transaction of the institute of British Geographers, 41(4) pp.528–540. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Beyond Ethics – communicating wisely. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2019). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.171-189. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accessed: 12-09-2019.





90

Elm, M. S. (2009). How do various notions of privacy influence decisions in qualitative internet research? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.69-87. Sage Publications. Ermann, D. M., Wlliams, M. B. & Shauf, M. S. (1997). Computers, Ethics, and Society. New York: Oxford University Press. Eskisabel-Azpiazu, A., Cerezo-Menéndez, R. & Gayo-Avello, D. (2017). An ethical inquiry into youth suicide prevention using social media mining. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.227-234. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Ess, C. (2014). Friendship, democracy, and citizen journalism. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics, 2, pp.120-156. Malden, Mass.: Polity. Ess, C. (2014). Still more ethical issues: digital sex and games. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics, 2, pp.157-196. Malden, Mass.: Polity. Ess, C. (2015). New selves, new research ethics? In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.48-76. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Evans, H., Ginnis, S. & Bartlett, J. (2015). #SocialEthics: a guide to embedding ethics in social media research. Accessed: 09-10-2018. Eysenbach, G. & Till, J. E. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 323(7321), pp.1103-1105. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Falconer, L. (2013). Situated learning in virtual simulations: Researching the authentic dimension in virtual worlds. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 24(3), pp.285-300. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Ferguson, R. D. (2017). Negotiating consent, compensation and privacy in internet research. ParentsLikeMe.com as a case study. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.269-275. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Fernback, J. (2016). Privacy rights and data brokers: the ethics of a targeted surveillance regime. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.207. New York: Peter Lang. Flicker, S., Haans, D. & Skinner, H. (2012). Ethical Dilemmas in Research on Internet Communities. In Hughes, J. (Eds.) (2012). Sage Library of Research Methods: Sage internet research methods, pp.221-232. London: Sage. Ford, H. (2014). Big Data and Small: Collaborations between ethnographers and data scientists. Big Data & Society, 1(2), pp.1-3.












91

Frosh, P. (2018). You have been tagged. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.117-136. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Gelinas, L. & Kesselheim, J. C. (2018). Social media and pediatric research recruitment. (2018). In Kodish, E. & Nelson, R. M. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics and research with children: a case-based approach (2 ed.). Oxford University Press. Goodyear, V. A. (2017). Social media, apps and wearable technologies: navigating ethical dilemmas and procedures. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 9(3), pp.285-302. Gunkel, D. J. (2016). Paradigm shift: media ethics in the age of intelligent machines. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.233-247. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Guryanova, A. V., Smotrova, I. V., Makhovikov, A. E. & Koychubaev, A. S. (2019). Socio-ethical Problems of the Digital Economy: Challenges and Risks. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (pp.96-102), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Hand, M. (2014). Digitization and memory: researching practices of adaption to visual and textual data in everyday life. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.205-230. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Harris, A. (2016). The ethics of researching images found online. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.61-73. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Hestres, L. E. (2016). The emerging ethics of digital political strategists. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.172-185. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Hine, C. (2009). How can qualitative internet researchers define the boundaries of their projects? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.1-20. Sage Publications. Hope, J. (2016). Mixing modes to widen research participation. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.71-86. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Hoser, B. & Nitschke, T. (2010). Questions on ethics for research in the virtually connected world. Social Networks, 32, pp.180–186. Hutchinson, E. (2014). Researching forums in online ethnography: practice and ethics. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.90-114. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.





92

Introna, L. D. (2019). Virtual Strangers: On the Social and Ethical Conditions of Virtual Communities. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.95–108. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 29-10-2019. Jahun, U. S. (2017). Online and Offline: The Ethical Considerations of Researching the Use of Social Media by Traditional Journalists in Northern Nigerian Newsroom. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (Eds.) (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.129-133. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Johansen, S. L. & Larsen, M. C. (2019). Børn, unge og medier. Samfundslitteratur. Johansen, S. L. & Larsen, M. C. (2020). Undersøgelser af børn, unge og medier. Samfundslitteratur. Kort og præcist om medier og kommunikation. Jung, H. (2016). Fuzzy boundaries when using “mental mapping” methods to trade the experiences of immigrant women in South Korea. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.31-44. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Kadushin, C. (2005). Who benefits from network analysis: ethics of social network research. Social Networks, 27, pp.139–153. Kantanen, H. & Manninen, J. (2016). Hazy boundaries: virtual communities and research ethics. Media and communication, 4(4), pp.86-96. Kamerer, D. (2012). Disclosing material connections online: legal and ethical issues. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.61-79. New York: Peter Lang. Karppi, T. (2018). “The Computer Said So”: On the Ethics, Effectiveness, and Cultural Techniques of Predictive Policing. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Kelly, A. R. (2016). Emerging genres of science communication and their ethical exigencies. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.3-18. New York: Peter Lang. Kendall, L. (2009). How do issues of gender and sexuality influence the structures and professes of qualitative internet research? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.99-118. Sage Publications. King, S. A. (1996). Researching Internet Communities: Proposed Ethical Guidelines for the Reporting of Results. The Information Society, 12(2), pp.119-128. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computerspace and cyberethics. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.283-321. London: Springer.






93

Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer networks and online crimes. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.323-342. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethics and the professions. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.65-96. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethics, technology, and value. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.37-63. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). New frontiers for computer ethics artificial intelligence, cyberspace, and virtual intelligence. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.263-281. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Social context of computing. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.157-199. London: Springer. Knox, J. (2016). What’s the matter with MOOCs? Socio-material methodologies for educational research. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.175-189. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Lagerkvist, A. (2018). The internet is always awake. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.189-209. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Langlois, G. (2018). Social media and the care of the self. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.156-170. London: Routledge. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Light, B., Mitchell, P. & Wikström, P. (2018). Big data, method and the ethics of location: a case study of a hookup app for men who have sex with men. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge. Markham, A. (2015). Produsing Ethics [for the digital near future]. In Lind, R. (Ed.) (2015). Produsing Theory in a Digital World 2.0: The Intersection of Audiences and Production in Contemporary Theory, 2, pp.247-366. Peter Lang. Digital Formations, (99). Markham, A. N. (2009). How can qualitative researchers produce work that is meaningful across time, space, and culture? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.131-155. Sage Publications. McKee, H. A. & Porter, J. E. (2009). The ethics of Internet research: a rhetorical, case-based process. New York: Peter Lang.






94

Miller, V. (2018). The ethics of digital being. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence - Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence in Digital Culture, pp.171-186. London: Routledge. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Mukherjee, I. (2017). Case study of ethical and privacy concerns in a digital ethnography of South Asian blogs against intimate partner violence. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.203-212. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Nancarrow, C., Pallister, J. & Brace, I. (2001). A new research medium, new research populations and seven deadly sins for Internet researchers. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 4(3), pp.136-149. Nenadic, I. (2017). Journalists on Twitter: Reconfiguring Professional Identity, Reconsidering Research Ethics – The Case of Croatia. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.111-117. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Nissenbaum, H. (2009). Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Nissenbaum, H. (2015). Respect for context as a benchmark for privacy online: what it is and isn't. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Olivero, N. & Lunt, P. (2004). The Case of E-Mail Qualitative Interviews. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.101-113. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Oravec, J. A. (2012). The ethics of sexting: issues involving consent and the production of intimate content. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.129-145. New York: Peter Lang. Pangestu, M. & Dewi, G. (2017). 13. Indonesia and the digital economy: creative destruction, opportunities and challenges. In Edwin Jurriens (Ed.) (2017). Digital Indonesia: Connectivity and Divergence, pp. 227–255. Singapore: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute Singapore. Pascoe, J. C. (2012). Studying young people's new media use: Methodological shifts and educational innovations. Theory into Practice, 51(2), pp.76-82. Pentzold, C. (2017). 'What are these researchers doing in my wikipedia?': Ethical premises and practical judgment in internet-based ethnography. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(2), pp.143-155. Peters, J. (2016). Considering and constraining the power of content hosts. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.105-122. New York: Peter Lang.





95

Pimienta, D. (2019). At the boundaries of ethics and cultures: virtual communities as an open ended process carrying the will for social change (the >>MISTICA<< experience). In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.205–228. Leiden, The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 18-09-2019. Pittman, M. & Bivins, T. (2016). Just war craft: virtue ethics and DotA. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.91-106. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Prinsloo, P. & Slade, S. (2017). An elephant in the learning analytics room – the obligation to act. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, pp.46-55. Ramïrez, G. B. & Palu-ay, L. (2015). "You don't look like your profile picture": The ethical implications of researching online identities in higher education. Educational Research and Evaluation, 21(2), pp.139-153. Reilly, E. (2012). Shaping our shadow. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.117-126. New York: Peter Lang. Riedel, J. (2017). Research Ethics in the Doctoral Project “Boundary Management in Social Media Communication”. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.153-156. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Roock, R. D., Bhatt, I. & Adams, J. (2016). Video analysis in digital literacy studies: exploring innovative methods. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.105-121. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Röschenthaler, U. M. (2017). Copying, branding, and the ethical implications of rights in immaterial cultural goods. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.101-121. Information Science Reference (ISR). Sabao, C. & Chingwaramusee, V. R. (2017). Citizen journalism on Facebook and the challenges of media regulation in Zimbabwe: Baba Jukwa. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.193-206. Information Science Reference (ISR). Sajuria, J. & Fábrega, J. (2016). Do we need polls? Why Twitter will not replace opinion surveys, but can complement them. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.87-104. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Sapienza, F. (2007). Ethos and research positionality in studies of virtual communities. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.89-106. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.




96

Schrum, L. (1997). Ethical Research in the Information Age: Beginning the Dialog. Computers in Human Behavior, 13(2), pp.117-125. Accessed: 13-11-2019. Segadal, K. U. (2015). Possibilities and limitations of Internet research: A legal framework. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.35-47. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Servida, F. & Casey, E. (2019). IoT forensic challenges and opportunities for digital traces. Digital Investigation, 28. Elsevier BV. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Shatzer, M. J. & Lindlof, T. R. (1998). Media ethnography in virtual space: Strategies, limits, and possibilities. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42(2), pp.170-189. Sicart, M. (2012). Instrumental play of the moral risks of gamification. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.210-230. New York: Peter Lang. Sidler, M. (2007). Playing scavenger and gazer with scientific discourse: opportunities and ethics for online research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.71-86. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Smith, B. (2007). Researching hybrid literacies: methodological explorations of “ethnography” and the practices of the cybertariat. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.127-149. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. St. Amant, K. (2004). International digital studies: a research approach for examining international online interactions. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.317-337. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Stevens, G., O'Donnell, V. L. & Williams, L. (2015). Public domain or private data? Developing an ethical approach to social media research in an inter-disciplinary project. Educational research and evaluation, 21(2), pp.154-167. Stirling, E. (2016). ‘I’m always on Facebook!’: Exploring Facebook as a mainstream research tool and ethnographic site. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.51-66. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Stroud, S. R. (2016). “Be a bully to beat a bully”: Twitter ethics, online identity, and the culture of quick revenge. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.264-278. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Taylor, N. & Hamilton, L. (2014). Investigating the other: considerations on multi-species research. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.251-272. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.

https://www-sciencedirect-com.zorac.aub.aau.dk/science/article/pii/S0747563297800015



97

Tene, O. & Polonetsky, J. (2013). The theory of Creepy: Technology, Privacy and Shifting Social Norms. Yale JL & Tech. 16(59). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Tilton, S. (2016). “Steve Jobs is dead”: iReport and the ethos of citizen journalism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.138-152. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Todd, S. (2010). The ethics of marketing to children. In Marshall, D. (2010). Understanding children as consumers. SAGE. Townsend, L. & Wallace, C. (2016). Social media research: A guide to ethics. Accessed: 24-09-2018. Vaughan, C. (2016). Different lenses: navigating ethics in cross-cultural research using photovoice. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.19-30. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Warr, D., Waycott, J., Guillemin, M. & Cox, S. (2016). Ethical issues in visual research and the value of stories from the field. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.1-16. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Watley, E. (2016). Race, gender, and digital media: the mis-adventures of awkward black girl and the representations of black female identity. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.248-263. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Waycott, J., Davis, H., Warr, D., Edmonds, F. & Taylor, G. (2017). Co-constructing Meaning and Negotiating Participation: Ethical Tensions when ‘Giving Voice’ through Digital Storytelling. Interact Computers, 29(2), pp.237-247. Wojak, R. (2012). The moral status of grieving. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.146-163. New York: Peter Lang. Wolfgang, J. D. (2016). Opening the marketplace: a case for the protection of anonymous online comments. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.85-103. New York: Peter Lang. Young, A. & MacDowall, L. (2017). Visual documentation in hybrid spaces: ethics, publics and transition. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.81-91.





98

ETHNO-GRAPHIC STUDIES


99

14. Ethnographic studies When researching social phenomena online, researchers have resorted to anthropological methods for data collection, such as observation (Puurveen et al., 2016), participatory studies (Nansen, et al., 2016), visual anthropology (Aarsand & Forsberg, 2010) and field research (Lohmeier, 2014), also known as ethnography. Ethnography has proven to be effective when investigating groups, cultures and societies because of its ability to focus in depth on specific groups of people. Ethnographers often use the method of field observation, to gain an in-depth perception of the group in focus, though the literature within this category enlightens several aspects of ethnography. As an example, researchers such as Natalia Grincheva (2017) have sought out ethnographic methods to investigate the behavior of online museum visitors. An increasing number of museums have entered the digital world with new and exciting means of giving their visitor an extraordinary experience with historical artifacts through interactive digital galleries, virtual three-dimensional museum simulators, blogs, etc. (Grincheva, 2017). Researchers in this category both discuss and use ethnography as a method for data collection. Aarsand, P. & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing children's corporeal privacy: ethnographic video recording as material-discursive practice. Qualitative research, 10(2), pp.249-268. Adolfo, E. (2016). Prototyping social sciences: emplacing digital methods. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.127-142. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Bancroft, A., Karels, M., Murray, Ó. M. & Zimpfer, J. (2014). Not being there: research at a distance with video, text and speech. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.137-154. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Banister, S. (2007). Ethical issues and qualitative methods in the 21st century: how can digital technologies be embraced in the research community? Journal of Ethnographic and Qualitative Research, 1, pp.1-10. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Barratt, M. J. & Maddox, A. (2016). Active engagement with stigmatised communities through digital ethnography. Qualitative research, 16(6), pp.701-719. Chan, S. (2013). Using videos and multimodal discourse analysis to study how students learn a trade. International Journal of Training Research, 11(1), pp.69-78. Clark, L. S. (2016). The ethics of engagement: considering digital ethics in a critical participatory action research project with urban youth. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.167-187. New York: Peter Lang. Ferguson, R. D. (2017). Negotiating consent, compensation and privacy in internet research. ParentsLikeMe.com as a case study. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.269-275. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.






100

Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), pp.553-565. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Forte, M. (2004). Co-construction and field creation: website development as both an instrument ad relationship in action research. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.219-245. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Goffey, A., Pettinger, L. & Speed, E. (2014). Politics, policy and privatization in the everyday experience of big data in the NHS. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.31-50. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Grincheva, N. (2017). Museum ethnography in the digital age: ethical considerations. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.187-194. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Hannes, K. & Parylo, O. (2014). Let’s Play It Safe: Ethical Considerations from Participants in a Photovoice Research Project. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13, pp.255-275. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hine, C. (2009). How can qualitative internet researchers define the boundaries of their projects? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.1-20. Sage Publications. Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N. J. & Hillman, A. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people's engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 17(3), pp.360-375. Hultman, K. & Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 23(5), pp.525-542. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hutchinson, E. (2014). Researching forums in online ethnography: practice and ethics. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.90-114. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Jahun, U. S. (2017). Online and Offline: The Ethical Considerations of Researching the Use of Social Media by Traditional Journalists in Northern Nigerian Newsroom. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (Eds.) (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.129-133. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Jung, H. (2016). Fuzzy boundaries when using “mental mapping” methods to trade the experiences of immigrant women in South Korea. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.31-44. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.








101

Krishnamurthy, S. (2004). The Ethics of Conducting E-Mail Surveys. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.114-129. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Larsen, M. C. (2018). Internetetnografi: På online feltarbejde mellem hverdagspraksisser og netværkskommunikation. I M. H. Jacobsen, & H. L. Jensen (Red.) (2018). Etnografier, 1, s.203-231. Hans Reitzels Forlag. SOCIOLOGI, 16. Larsen, M. C. & Glud, L. N. (2013). Nye medier, nye metoder, nye etiske udfordringer. Metode & Forskningsdesign, 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Lohmeier, C. (2014). The researcher and the never-ending field: reconsidering big data and digital ethnography. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.75-90. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Markham, A. N. (2005). The methods, politics, and ethics of representation in online ethnography. In Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.) (2005). The sage handbook of qualitative research, 3, pp.793-820. Markham, A. N. (2017). Troubling the concept of data in digital qualitative research. In Flick, U. (Ed.) (2017). Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection, pp.511-523. London: Sage. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2017). Research ethics in context: Decision making in digital research. In Schäfer, M. T. & van Es, K. (Eds.) (2017). The Datafied Society: Studying culture through data, pp.201-209. Amsterdam University Press B.V. Mukherjee, I. (2017). Case study of ethical and privacy concerns in a digital ethnography of South Asian blogs against intimate partner violence. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.203-212. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Nansen, B., Wilken, R., Kennedy, J., Arnold, M. & Gibbs, M. (2016). Methodological and ethical concerns associated with digital ethnography in domestic environments: participant burden and burdensome technologies. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.45-59. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Oliver, J. (2019). Imagining technique: reflexivity, ethnographic arts and the digital-real. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.117-129. Palys, T. & Atchison, C. (2012). Qualitative research in the digital era: Obstacles and opportunities. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 11(4), pp.352-367. Pauwels, L. (2006). Ethical Issues of Online (Visual) Research. Visual Anthropology, 19, pp.365–369. Accessed: 26-09-2018.






102

Pentzold, C. (2017). 'What are these researchers doing in my wikipedia?': Ethical premises and practical judgment in internet-based ethnography. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(2), pp.143-155. Pink, S. (2017). Technologies, possibilities, emergence and an ethics of responsibility: refiguring techniques. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.1-12. Pink, S. & Lanzeni, D. (2018). Future anthropology ethics and datafication: temporality and responsibility in research. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Pope, C.C., De Luca, R. & Tolich, M. (2010). How an exchange of perspectives led to tentative ethical guidelines for visual ethnography. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), pp.301-315. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Puurveen, G., Phinney, A., Cox, S. & Purves, B. (2016). Ethical considerations in the use of video observations in dementia end-of-life care research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.105-115. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Reich, J. A. (2015). Old methods and new technologies: Social media and shifts in power in qualitative research. Ethnography, 16(4), pp.394-415. Robson, J. (2017). Participant anonymity and participant observations: situating the researcher within digital ethnography. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.195-202. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Roock, R. D., Bhatt, I. & Adams, J. (2016). Video analysis in digital literacy studies: exploring innovative methods. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for social science: an interdisciplinary guide to research innovation, pp.105-121. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Shatzer, M. J. & Lindlof, T. R. (1998). Media ethnography in virtual space: Strategies, limits, and possibilities. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42(2), pp.170-189. Shuter, J. & Burroughs, B. (2017). The ethics of sensory ethnography: virtual reality fieldwork in zones of conflict. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.281-285. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Sidze, S. M., Köhler, T. & Szarzynski, J. (2017). Ethical Issues in Collecting Data from Informant of the Field. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (Eds.) (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.101-104. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Sin, H. L. (2015). “You're not doing work, you're on Facebook!”: Ethics of encountering the field through social media. The Professional geographer, 67(4), pp.676-685.










103

Smith, B. (2007). Researching hybrid literacies: methodological explorations of “ethnography” and the practices of the cybertariat. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.127-149. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Stirling, E. (2016). ‘I’m always on Facebook!’: Exploring Facebook as a mainstream research tool and ethnographic site. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an interdisciplinary guide to research innovation, pp.51-66. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Sumiala, J. (2018). Digital rituals and the quest for existential security. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.210-226. London: Routledge. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Suomela, T., Chee, F., Berendt, B. & Rockwell, G. (2019). Applying an Ethics of Care to Internet Research: Gamergate and Digital Humanities. Digital Studies/Le champ numérique, 9(1), Open Library of the Humanities. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Sveningsson, M. (2004). Ethics in internet ethnography. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.45-61. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Taylor, N. & Hamilton, L. (2014). Investigating the other: considerations on multi-species research. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.251-272. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Tiidenberg, K. (2018). Research ethics, vulnerability, and trust on the internet. In Hunsinger, J., Klastrup, L. & Allen, M. (Eds.) (2018). Second international handbook of internet research, pp.1-15. Dordrecht. Springer. Tummons, J. (2014). Using software for qualitative data analysis: research outside paradigmatic boundaries. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.155-180. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Turin, M. (2011). Born Archival: The Ebb and Flow of Digital Documents from the Field. History and Anthropology, 22(4), pp.445–460. Walstrom, K. M. (2004). Ethics and engagement in communication scholarship: analyzing public, online support groups as researcher/participant-experiencer. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.174-202. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. E. (2015). Uncovering the challenges in collection, sharing and documentation: The hidden data of social media research? Pp.28-37. In AAAI Workshop - Technical Report.





104

Whiteman, N. (2012). Undoing ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York: Springer.


105

FABRICATION


106

15. Fabrication “You don’t look like your profile picture”. Fabrication comes in many shapes and sizes: we can portray ourselves however we desire through social media, researchers can “adapt” their data to better fit their ideas, hackers can make it look like we did misdeeds online, we can even make it look like the president of the United States is a democrat, using Deep Fake face-swaps. When Gerardo Ramírez and Lyssa Palu-ay (2015) state, that “You don’t look like your profile picture”, they draw on the idea that universities tend to brand themselves in a certain way, to look desirable to the rest of the world, much like social media users do when constructing their online personas. Other researchers, such as Annette Markham (2012) believe that researchers tend to “transfigure” data, which can expose our participants. Literature in this category is focused on fabrication – in whatever shape or size it may occur. Ayers, D. M. (2004). Fact or fiction: notes of a man interviewing women online. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.262-273. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Chari, T. (2017). Ethical pitfalls in the digital age: when the desire to “serve hot” gets in the way of verification. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.25-43. Information Science Reference (ISR). Clark, A. (2011). Breaking methodological boundaries? Exploring visual, participatory methods with adults and young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), pp.321-330. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Deception in Sourcing and Presentation. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.136-153. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Elliot, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Media Corruption. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.154-169. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Guest, C. (2016). Cultivating reflexive research practice when using participants’ photographs as research data. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.75-87. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Kamerer, D. (2012). Disclosing material connections online: legal and ethical issues. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.61-79. New York: Peter Lang. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer Crimes. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.239-262. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computerspace and cyberethics. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.283-321. London: Springer.




107

Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethics and the professions. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.65-96. London: Springer. Markham, A. (2012). Fabrication as ethical practice: qualitative inquiry in ambiguous internet contexts. Information, Communication and Society, 15(3), pp.334-353. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Mok, T. M., Cornish, F. & Tarr, J. (2015). Too Much Information: Visual Research Ethics in the Age of Wearable Cameras. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral, 49, pp.309–322. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Popoola, T. (2017). Ethical and legal challenges of election reporting in Nigeria - a study of four general elections, 1999-2011. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.78-100. Information Science Reference (ISR). Ramírez, G. B. & Palu-ay, L. (2015). "You don't look like your profile picture": The ethical implications of researching online identities in higher education. Educational Research and Evaluation, 21(2), pp.139-153. Schuck, S. & Kearney, M. (2006). Using digital video as a research tool: Ethical issues for researchers. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(4), pp.447-463. Sparks, H., Collins, F. L. & Kearns, R. (2016). Reflecting on the risks and ethical dilemmas of digital research. Geoforum, 77, pp.40-46. Accessed: 26-09-2018.








108

GAMES/GA-MIFICATION


109

16. Games/Gamification The latest addition to this collection of literature is Games and Gamification. This category is relevant and important because of the explosion of e-sports and new opportunities that have arisen within the fields of Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality, while media from around the world has started to focus more on the world championships of major games such as Counterstrike. Authors such as José Zarandona, Adam Chapman and Darshana Jayemanne (2018) have chosen to focus on how videogame developers often use historical and cultural sites, such as the National and University Library in Sarajevo, as fields for videogames. The authors investigate the ethical implications of using locations that have historical meaning and the national heritage in games. Dig into the category to learn more about the ethical implications of games and gamification. Busch, T. (2016). Corporate responsibility in the videogames industry: mapping the territory. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.63-81. New York: Peter Lang. Chess, S. (2016). Not your mother’s video game: the role of motherhood in video game advertising. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.295-307. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Condis, Megan (2019). Hateful Games. Digital Ethics (pp.143-159), Routledge. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Hope, A. (2017). World of Spycraft: video games, gamification and surveillance creep. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.162-173. Introna, L. D. (2019). Virtual Strangers: On the Social and Ethical Conditions of Virtual Communities. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.95–108. Leiden, The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 29-10-2019. Richardson, I., Hjorth, L., Strengers, Y. & Balmford, W. (2017). Careful surveillance at play: human-animal relations and mobile media in the home. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.105-116. Roberts, D. (2017). ‘Getting What They Deserve’: Digital Media Readers Comment on the Cause of Detroit’s Bankruptcy. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.107-110. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Accessed: 29-10-2019. Rogers, R. (2016). The harm of video games: the ethics behind regulating minors’ access to violent video games in light of the supreme court ruling. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.216-230. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.





110

Rooney, T. (2017). Spy kids too: encounters with surveillance through games and play. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.149-161. Sicart, M. (2012). Instrumental play of the moral risks of gamification. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.210-230. New York: Peter Lang. Suomela, Todd, Chee, Florence, Berendt, Bettina, & Rockwell, Geoffrey (2019). Applying an Ethics of Care to Internet Research: Gamergate and Digital Humanities. Digital Studies/Le champ numérique, 9(1), Open Library of the Humanities. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Zarandona, J. A. G., Chapman, A. & Jayemanne, D. (2018). Heritage Destruction and Videogames: Ethical Challenges of the Representation of Cultural Heritage. Transactions of the Digital Games Research Association, 4(2), Digital Games Research Association. Accessed: 09-09-2019.



http://todigra.org/index.php/todigra/article/view/93

http://todigra.org/index.php/todigra/article/view/93


111

GUIDELINES


112

17. Guidelines Understanding how to navigate in the extensive landscape of data-collection methods and digital ethics can be troublesome and almost incomprehensible. A list of researchers seeks to unveil how to, ethically, go about researching in the digital world by demonstrating how their own research proceeded. Literature in this category, such as the newest Ethical Guidelines by the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR), can function as a how-to guide in doing digital research. Ahmed, W., Bath, P. A. & Demartini, G. (2017). Using Twitter as a Data Source: An Overview of Ethical, Legal and Methodological Challenges. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.79-107. Association of Internet Research (2012). Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research. Accessed: 24-09-2018. Baalen, S. V. (2018). ‘Google wants to know your location’: The ethical challenges of fieldwork in the digital age. Research Ethics, 14(4) (pp.1-17), SAGE Publications. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Bakardjieva, M., Feenberg, A. & Goldie, J. (2004). User-centered internet research: the ethical challenge. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.338-350. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Banks, W. & Eble, M. (2007). Digital spaces, online environments, and human participant research: interfacing with institutional review boards. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.27-47. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Barratt, M. J. & Maddox, A. (2016). Active engagement with stigmatised communities through digital ethnography. Qualitative research, 16(6), pp.701-719. Baym, N. K. (2009). What constitutes quality in qualitative internet research? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.173-189. Sage Publications. Blythe, S. (2007). Coding digital texts and multimedia. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.203-227. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Boehlefeld, S. P. (2011). Doing the Right Thing: Ethical Cyberspace Research. The Information Society 12(2), pp.141-152. Bruckman, A. (2002). Ethical Guidelines for Research Online. Georgia Institute of Technology. Accessed: 13-11-2019.

https://aoir.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/aoir_ethics_graphic_2016.pdf



https://www.cc.gatech.edu/~asb/ethics/


113

Buchanan, E.A. & Zimmer, M. (2013). Internet research ethics. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.) (2013). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Bugeja, M. (2018). Living media ethics – across platforms. Routledge. Burnett, J., Chandler, S. & Lopez, J. (2007). A report from the digital contact zone: collaborative research and the hybridizing of cultural mindsets. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.319-336. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Casey, E., Geradts, Z. & Nikkel, B. (2018). Transdisciplinary strategies for digital investigation challenges. Digital Investigation, 25 (pp.1-4), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Clark, K., Duckham, M., Guillemin, M., Hunter, A., McVernon, J., O’Keefe, C., Pitkin, C., Prawer, S., Sinnott, R., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2018). Advancing the ethical use of digital data in human research: challenges and strategies to promote ethical practice. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(1) (pp.59-73), Springer Science and Business Media LLC. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Carusi, A. & Jirotka, M. (2009). From data archive to ethical labyrinth. Qualitative research, 9(3), pp.285-298. Clark, L. S. (2016). The ethics of engagement: considering digital ethics in a critical participatory action research project with urban youth. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.167-187. New York: Peter Lang. Cox, S., Drew, S., Guillemin, M., Howell, C., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2014). Guidelines for ethical visual research methods. Melbourne Social Equity Institute. Accessed: 09-10-2018. Cox, S. M. (2016). From adversaries to allies: ethical review in the context of visual and other innovative methods. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.251-262. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Cutter-Mackenzie, A., Edwards, S. & Quinton, H.W. (2015). Childframed video research methodologies: issues, possibilities and challenges for researching with children. Children's Geographies, 13 (3), pp.343-356. Dickens, L. & Butcher, M. (2016). Going public? Re-thinking visibility, ethics and recognition through participatory research praxis. Transaction of the institute of British Geographers, 41 (4) pp.528–540. Doyle, E. (2017). Embracing qualitative research: a visual model for nuanced research ethics oversight. Qualitative research, 17(1), pp.95-117. Accessed: 28-09-2018.











114

Elgesem, D. 2002. What is Special about the Ethical Issues in Online Research? Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.195-203. Accessed: 13-11-2019. Elm, M. S. (2009). How do various notions of privacy influence decisions in qualitative internet research? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.69-87. Sage Publications. Ess, C. & Jones, S. (2004). Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the AoIR. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.27-44. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Ess, C. (2014). Central issues in the ethics of Digital Media. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics, 2, pp.1-34. Malden, Mass.: Polity. Ess, C. (2014). Digital Media Ethics: Overview, Frameworks, Resources. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics, 2, pp.197-262. Malden, Mass.: Polity. Evans, H., Ginnis, S. & Bartlett, J. (2015). #SocialEthics: a guide to embedding ethics in social media research. Accessed: 09-10-2018. Fayoyin, A. (2017). Electoral polling and reporting in Africa: professional and policy implications for media practice and political communication in a digital age. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.164-181. Information Science Reference (ISR). Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), pp.553-565. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Flewitt, R. (2019). Ethics and researching young children’s digital literacy practices. In Erstad, O., Flewitt, R., Kümmerling-Meibauer, B. & Periera, I. S. P. (Eds.) (2019). The Routledge Handbook of Digital Literacies in Early Childhood, pp.64-78. London: Routledge. Flicker, S., Haans, D. & Skinner, H. (2012). Ethical Dilemmas in Research on Internet Communities. In Hughes, J. (Ed.) (2012). Sage Library of Research Methods: SAGE internet research methods, pp.221-232. London: SAGE. Franzke, A. S., Bechmann, A., Zimmer, M., Ess, C. & the Association of Internet Researchers (2020). Internet Research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0. Accessed: 02-12-2019. Geisler, C. & Slattery, S. (2007). Capturing the activity of digital writing: using, analyzing, and supplementing video screen capture. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.185-200. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Ginnis, S. (2017). Where Next for #SocialEthics? In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.209-236.







115

Gray, B., Hilder, J., Macdonald, L., Tester, R., Dowell, A. & Stubbe, M. (2016). Are research ethics guidelines culturally competent? Research Ethics, 13 (1), pp.23-41. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Gruwell, L. (2019). Feminist Research on the Toxic Web. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.87-103. New York: Routledge. Hand, M. (2014). From cyberspace to the dataverse: trajectories in digital social research. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.1-30. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Hart-Davidson, W. (2007). Studying the mediated action of composing with time-use diaries. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.153-170. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Hewson, C. (2016). Ethics issues in digital methods research. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.206-221. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Hilligoss, S. & Williams, S. (2007). Composition meets visual communication: new research questions. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.229-247. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Hope, J. (2016). Mixing modes to widen research participation. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.71-86. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Howell, C., Cox, S., Drew, S., Guillemin, M., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2014). Exploring ethical frontiers of visual methods. Research ethics review, 10(4), pp.208-213. Jadue Roa, D. S. (2017). Ethical issues in listening to young children in visual participatory research. International journal of inclusive education, 21(3), pp.332-345. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Kelly, P., Marshall, S. J., Badland, H., Kerr, J., Oliver, M. & Doherty, A. R. et al. (2013). An Ethical Framework for Automated, Wearable Cameras in Health Behavior Research. American journal of preventive medicine, 44(3), pp.314-319. Accessed: 26-09-2018. King, S. A. (1996). Researching Internet Communities: Proposed Ethical Guidelines for the Reporting of Results. The Information Society, 12(2), pp.119-128. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Biometrics. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.359-375. London: Springer.








116

Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer crime investigations – computer forensics. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.343-358. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer Crimes. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.239-262. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer networks and online crimes. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.323-342. London: Springer. Knox, J. (2016). What’s the matter with MOOCs? Socio-material methodologies for educational research. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.175-189. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Kosinski, M., Matz, S. C., Gosling, S. D., Popov, V. & Stillwell, D. (2015). Facebook as a research tool for the social sciences: Opportunities, challenges, ethical considerations, and practical guidelines. The American psychologist, 70(6), pp.543-556. Krishnamurthy, S. (2004). The Ethics of Conducting E-Mail Surveys. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.114-129. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Larsen, M. C. & Glud, L. N. (2013). Nye medier, nye metoder, nye etiske udfordringer. Metode & Forskningsdesign, 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Lawson, D. (2004). Blurring the Boundaries: Ethical Considerations for Online Research Using Synchronous CMC Forums. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.80-100. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge. Lomborg, S. (2013). Personal internet archives and ethics. Research Ethics, 9(1), pp.20-31. Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D. & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical Use of Social Media to Facilitate Qualitative Research. Qualitative health research, 25(1), pp.99-109. Maczewski, M., Storey, M. A. & Hoskins, M. (2004). Conducting Congruent, Ethical, Qualitative Research in Internet Mediated Research Environments. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.62-79. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Markham, A. N. (2018). Afterword: Ethics as Impact—Moving From Error-Avoidance and Concept-Driven Models to a Future-Oriented Approach. Social media and society, 4(3). Markham, A. N. (2006). Ethic as Method, Method as Ethic: A Case for Reflexivity in Qualitative ICT Research. Information ethics.



117

Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2015). Internet research: ethical concerns. In Wright, J. (Ed.) (2015). International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, pp.606-613. Elsevier Science. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2017). Research ethics in context: Decision making in digital research. In Schäfer, M. T. & van Es, K. (Eds.) (2017). The Datafied Society: Studying culture through data, pp.201-209. Amsterdam University Press B.V. McKee, H. A. & Porter, J. E. (2009). The ethics of Internet research: a rhetorical, case-based process. New York: Peter Lang. Metcalf, J., Boyd, D. & Keller, E. (2016). Perspectives on Big Data, Ethics, and Society. Council for Big Data, Ethics, and Society. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Metcalf, J. & Crawford, K. (2016). Where are human subjects in Big Data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1), pp.1-14. Mok, T. M., Cornish, F. & Tarr, J. (2015). Too Much Information: Visual Research Ethics in the Age of Wearable Cameras. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral, 49, pp.309–322. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Moreno, M. A., Goniu, N., Moreno, P. S. & Diekema, D. (2013). Ethics of Social Media Research: Common Concerns and Practical Considerations. Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking, 16(9), pp.708-713. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Palys, T. & Atchison, C. (2012). Qualitative Research in the Digital Era: Obstacles and Opportunities. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 11(4), pp.352-367. Pascoe, J. C. (2012). Studying young people's new media use: Methodological shifts and educational innovations. Theory into Practice, 51(2), pp.76-82. Pentzold, C. (2017). 'What are these researchers doing in my wikipedia?': Ethical premises and practical judgment in internet-based ethnography. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(2), pp.143-155. Pope, C.C., De Luca, R. & Tolich, M. (2010). How an exchange of perspectives led to tentative ethical guidelines for visual ethnography. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), pp.301-315. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Richardson, L. (2018). Ethical Challenges in Digital Public Archaeology. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology, 1(1) (pp.64-73), Ubiquity Press, Ltd. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Roberts, J. & Steiner, L. (2012). Ethics of citizen journalism sites. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.80-98. New York: Peter Lang.










118

Roberts, L., Smith, L. & Pollock, C. (2004). Conducting ethical research online: respect for individuals, identities and the ownership of words. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.156-173. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Romberger, J. (2007). An ecofeminist methodology: studying the ecological dimensions of the digital environment. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.249-267. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies: an introduction to researching with visual materials, pp.357-370. London: Sage Publications. Salmons, J. (2017). Getting to Yes: Informed Consent in Qualitative Social Media Research. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.109 -134. Saunders, B., Kitzinger, J. & Kitzinger, C. (2015). Participant Anonymity in the Internet Age: From Theory to Practice. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), pp.125-137. Schrum, L. (1997). Ethical Research in the Information Age: Beginning the Dialog. Computers in Human Behavior, 13(2), pp.117-125. Accessed: 13-11-2019. Seko, Y. & Lewis, S. P. (2017). “We tend to err on the side of caution”: ethical challenges facing Canadian research ethics boards when overseeing internet research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.133-147.New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Smithies, J. (2017). The Ethics of Production. In Smithies, J. (2017). The Digital Humanities and the Digital Modern, pp.203-235. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. Accessed: 12-09-2019. Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Staksrud, E. (2019). Top ten types of informed consent your supervisor never told you about. Journal of Children and Media, 13:4, 490-493. Accessed: 28-10-2019. Stevens, G., O'Donnell, V. L. & Williams, L. (2015). Public domain or private data? Developing an ethical approach to social media research in an inter-disciplinary project. Educational research and evaluation, 21(2), pp.154-167. Stirling, E. (2016). ‘I’m always on Facebook!’: Exploring Facebook as a mainstream research tool and ethnographic site. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.51-66. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

https://www-sciencedirect-com.zorac.aub.aau.dk/science/article/pii/S0747563297800015







119

Sugiura, L., Wiles, R. & Pope, C. (2016). Ethical challenges in online research: Public/private perceptions. Research Ethics, 13(3-4). Accessed: 14-10-2019. Taylor, J. & Pagliari, C. (2017). Mining social media data: how are research sponsors and researchers addressing the ethical challenges? Research Ethics, 14(2). Accessed: 14-10-2019. Tene, O. & Polonetsky, J. (2013). The theory of Creepy: Technology, Privacy and Shifting Social Norms. Yale JL & Tech. 16(59). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Townsend, L. & Wallace, C. (2016). Social media research: A guide to ethics. Accessed: 24-09-2018. Townsend, L. & Wallace, C. (2017). The Ethics of Using Social Media Data in Research: A New Framework. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.189-207. Townsend, L., Wallace, C., Fuchs, C., Jessop, C., Harte, D., Vallejos, E. P., Lepps, H., Holden, J., Johnston, K. O., Sloan, L., Smith, M., McGregor, S. & Hall, S. (2016). Social Media Research: A Guide to Ethics. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Venturini, T., Bounegru, L., Gray, J. & Rogers, R. (2018). A reality check(list) for digital methods. New media & society. Walstrom, K. M. (2004). Ethics and engagement in communication scholarship: analyzing public, online support groups as researcher/participant-experiencer. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.174-202. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. E. (2014). “I love thinking about ethics!” Perspectives on ethics in social media research. Internet Research (IR15), Deagu, South Korea, 22. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. E. (2015). Uncovering the challenges in collection, sharing and documentation: The hidden data of social media research?. In AAAI Workshop - Technical Report, pp.28-37. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. E. (2016). A manifesto for data sharing in social media research. Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Web Science, pp.166-172. New York NY: ACM. Whiteman, N. (2012). Undoing ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York: Springer. Wyatt, S. (2012). Ethics of e-Research in social sciences and humanities. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.5-20. New York: Peter Lang.








http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/uploads/socialmediaethics_guidelines.pdf

http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/uploads/socialmediaethics_guidelines.pdf




120

Zimmer, M. (2018). Addressing conceptual gaps in big data research ethics: an application of contextual integrity. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Zwitter, A. (2014). Big Data ethics. Big Data & Society, 1(2). Accessed: 26-09-2018.





121

HEALTH RESEARCH


122

18. Health research Digital health gives us new opportunities as well as new challenges. Latest digital health aids such as sport watches, pulse watches, smartwatches and other forms of watches that enable you to view and track yourself may provide us with unique insight into our bodies and ourselves, but it comes at a cost. Our personal, bodily data becomes digitalized and thereby vulnerable to cyberattacks or other privacy issues, such as companies collecting our data without us knowing. Researcher Nathan Cortez (2018) argues that despite the development of new technologies in digital health, we still only awkwardly adapt current laws and regulations to fit the current stage of digital health. If our laws are not updated to protect our state and federal consumers and data privacy and security, we could potentially be facing major ethical issues. Balmer, C., Griffiths, F. & Dunn, J. (2015). A review of the issues and challenges involved in using participant-produced photographs in nursing research. Journal of advanced nursing, 71(7), pp.1726-1737. Banister, S. (2007). Ethical issues and qualitative methods in the 21st century: how can digital technologies be embraced in the research community? Journal of Ethnographic and Qualitative Research, 1, pp.1-10. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Cortez, N. (2018). The Evolving Law and Ethics of Digital Health. In Rivas, H. & Wac, K. (2018). Digital Health – Scaling Healthcare to the World, pp.249-269. Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Culver, K. B. & Mirer, M. (2016). Constrained independence: digital branded content in sports through the lens of journalism ethics. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.19-39. New York: Peter Lang. Dunseath, S., Weibel, N., Bloss, C. S. & Nebeker, C. (2018). NIH support of mobile, imaging, pervasive sensing, social media and location tracking (MISST) research: laying the foundation to examine research ethics in the digital age. Npj Digital Medicine, 1(1), Springer Nature. Accessed: 10-09-2019. Eysenbach, G. & Till, J. E. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 323(7321), pp.1103-1105. Ferguson, R. D. (2017). Negotiating consent, compensation and privacy in internet research. ParentsLikeMe.com as a case study. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.269-275. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Gard, M. & Lupton, D. (2017). Digital health goes to school: implications of digitising children’s bodies. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.36-49.










123

Goodman, K. W. (2017). Introduction: Symposium on Ethical Issues in Data Science and Digital Medicine. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 26(2) (pp.326-327), Cambridge University Press (CUP). Accessed: 16-09-2019. Goodyear, V. A. (2017). Social media, apps and wearable technologies: navigating ethical dilemmas and procedures. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 9(3), pp.285-302. Gubrium, A. C., Hill, A.L. & Flicker, S. (2014). A Situated Practice of Ethics for Participatory Visual and Digital Methods in Public Health Research and Practice: A Focus on Digital Storytelling. American Journal of Public Health 104 (9), pp.1606-1614. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hammer, M. J. (2017). Research ethics in big data. Oncology nursing forum, 44(3), pp.293-295. Kelly, P., Marshall, S. J., Badland, H., Kerr, J., Oliver, M. & Doherty, A. R. et al. (2013). An Ethical Framework for Automated, Wearable Cameras in Health Behavior Research. American journal of preventive medicine, 44(3), pp.314-319. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D. & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical Use of Social Media to Facilitate Qualitative Research. Qualitative health research, 25(1), pp.99-109. Monks, H., Cardoso, P., Papageorgiou, A., Carolan, C., Costello, L. & Thomas, L. (2015). Young people's views regarding participation in mental health and wellbeing research through social media. International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(1), pp.4-19. Mudaly, N. (2015). The Rights of Pre-verbal Children involved in Video-recorded Research An Examination of the Ethical Issues. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 23, pp.391-404. Nebeker, C. (2015). A multi-case study of research using mobile imaging, sensing and tracking technologies to objectively measure behavior: ethical issues and insights to guide responsible research practice. Journal of Research Administration, 46(1), pp.118-137. Redon, E. D. & Centi, A. (2019). Realities of conducting digital health research: Challenges to consider. Digital Health, 5, SAGE Publications. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Schaarschmidt, N. (2017). Media Ethics in Research on Video-Based Mental Health Care. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.137-142. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Stahl, B. (2019). Digital events and the ethics of neuro-ICT. In Kreps, D. (Ed.) (2019). Digital Ethics - Bergson, Whitehead, and the Experience of the Digital, pp.85-95. London: Routledge. Vayena, E., Haeusermann, T., Adjekum, A. & Blasimme, A. (2018). Digital health: meeting the ethical and policy challenges. Swiss Medical Weekly, 148(34), EMH Swiss Medical Publishers, Ltd. Accessed: 04-09-2019.













124

MIXED, NICE STUFF


125

19. Mixed, nice stuff Though we believe that our categorization of the literature can provide you with a sufficient overview and potentially guide you in your literature quest, we have also encountered literature that exceeds the categories we have developed. The category is no less relevant to digital ethics, and nor is the literature. This category represents all the “mixed, nice stuff” that we were unable to categorize. Allen, A. L. (2015). The duty to protect your own privacy. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Bechmann, A. (2014). Non-informed consent cultures: privacy policies and app contracts on Facebook. Journal of media business studies, 11(1), pp.21-38. Accessed: 02-10-2018. Bennett, L., Chin, B. & Jones, B. (2016). Between ethics, privacy, fandom, and social media: new trajectories that challenge media producer/fan relations. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.107-122. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Burkell, J. A. (2016). Remembering me: Big data, individual identity, and the psychological necessity of forgetting. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(1). Accessed: 26-09-2018. DeCew, J. W. (2015). Connecting informational, Fourth Amendment and constitutional privacy. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. DePew, K. (2007). Through the eyes of researchers, rhetors, and audiences: triangulating data from the digital writing situation. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.49-69. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Dreyfus, H. (2001). On the Internet. New York: Routledge. Elichirigoity, F. (2019). The internet, information machines, and the technologies of the Self. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.289–300. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 19-10-2019. Ermann, D. M., Wlliams, M. B. & Shauf, M. S. (1997). Computers, Ethics, and Society. New York: Oxford University Press. Ess, C. M. (2018). Afterword. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.264-227. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019.





https://cryptome.org/2013/01/aaron-swartz/On-the-Internet.pdf





126

Evans, H., Ginnis, S. & Bartlett, J. (2015). #SocialEthics: a guide to embedding ethics in social media research. Accessed: 14-09-2018. Fernback, J. (2016). Privacy rights and data brokers: the ethics of a targeted surveillance regime. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.207. New York: Peter Lang. Frohmann, B. (2000). Cyber Ethics: Bodies or Bytes? The International Information & Library Review, 32, pp.423-435. Frølunde, L. (2017). Akademisk video: forskeren som formidler, historiefortæller eller dialogist. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.205-225. Frederiksberg. Samfundslitteratur. Granata, Y. (2018). Digital unworld(s). In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.100-114. London: Routledge. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Grincheva, N. (2017). Museum ethnography in the digital age: ethical considerations. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.187-194. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Grønning, A. (2017). Sensitivt digitalt medieindhold: at undersøge fostre på Facebook. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.185-205. Frederiksberg. Samfundslitteratur. Guryanova, A.V. (2019). Digital Economy As A Social Phenomenon: Ethical Challenges And Perspectives Of Development. Cognitive-Crcs. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Guryanova, A.V. (2019). Digital Ethics as an instrument for the technological challenges' regulation. Cognitive-Crcs. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Hausmanninger, T. (2019). Allowing the difference: some preliminary remarks concerning intercultural information ethics. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.39-56. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 16-09-2019. Helbing, D. (2018). Societal, Economic, Ethical and Legal Challenges of the Digital Revolution: From Big Data to Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, and Manipulative Technologies. Towards Digital Enlightenment (pp.47-72), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Himma, K. E. (2015). Why security trumps privacy. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.















127

Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N. J. & Hillman, A. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people's engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 17(3), pp.360-375. Jane, E. A. (2015). Flaming? what flaming? the pitfalls and potentials of researching online hostility. Ethics and Information Technology, 17(1), pp.65-87. Jensen, H. S. (2017). Digitale arkiver som medskabere i ny historieskrivning. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.69-87. Frederiksberg. Samfundslitteratur. Jensen, J. L. (2017). Same, same but different: udfordringer og muligheder ved at undersøge og sammenligne Facebook og Twitter. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.109-127. Frederiksberg. Samfundslitteratur. Klastrup, L. (2017). Death, affect and the ethical challenges of outing a griefsquatter. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.235-242. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Langlois, G. (2018). Social media and the care of the self. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.156-170. London: Routledge. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Lever, A. (2015). Democracy, privacy and security. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Madsen, A. K. (2017). Mellem algoritmisk automatisering og faglig intuition: semantisk netværksanalyse og participatorisk datadesign. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.87-104. Frederiksberg. Samfundslitteratur. Mathiesen, K. (2015). Transparency for democracy: the case of open government data. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Markham, A. N. (2018). Taking the methods classroom to the streets: Using reflexive qualitative methods to find the better questions for building data literacy. Qualitative Inquiry. Matzner, T. & Ochs, C. (2017). Sorting things out ethically: privacy as a research issue beyond the individual. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.39-52. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.






128

Miko-Schefzig, K. & Reiter, C. (2018). Participatory Organization Research in the Context of the Police: Ethical Research with Vulnerable Groups Using the Example of Detention Centers. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018. Mokrosinska, D. (2015). Privacy, freedom of speech and the sexual lives of office holders. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Moore, A. D. (2015). Why privacy and accountability trump security. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Newell, B. C. (2015). Mass surveillance, privacy and freedom: a case for public access to government surveillance information. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Peters, J. (2016). Considering and constraining the power of content hosts. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.105-122. New York: Peter Lang. Pittman, M. & Sheehan, K. (2017). Ethics of using online commercial crowdsourcing sites for academic research: the case of Amazon’s mechanical Turk. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.177-186. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Poor, N. (2017). The ethics of using hacked data: Patreon’s data hack and academic data standards. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.277-280. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Puschmann, C. (2017). Bad judgment, bad ethics? Validity in computational social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.95-113. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Ramïrez, G. B. & Palu-ay, L. (2015). "You don't look like your profile picture": The ethical implications of researching online identities in higher education. Educational Research and Evaluation, 21(2), pp.139-153. Rubel, A. (2015). Privacy, transparency and accountability in the NSA's bulk metadata program. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Schaer, P. (2017). Living labs – an ethical challenge for researchers and platform operators. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.167-176. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.












129

Strossen, N. (2015). Post-9/11 government surveillance, suppression and secrecy. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Sützl, W. (2019). Internet and free networks. From world-networking to place-networking. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.243–262. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed 11-09-2019. Sweeney, P. (2017). Images of faces gleaned from social media social psychological research on sexual orientation. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.287-291. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Taylor, J. S. (2015). Privacy and the dead. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Teich, A., Frankel, M. S., Kling, R. & Lee, Y. (2006). Anonymous Communication Policies for the Internet: Results and Recommendations of the AAAS Conference. The information society – an international journal, 15(2), pp.71-77. Accessed: 13-11-2019. Vestergaard, V. (2017). Datagenerering med API fra sociale netværksplatforme. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.51-69. Frederiksberg. Samfundslitteratur. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (2017). To share or not to share? Ethical challenges in sharing social media-based research data. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.115-129. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Whelan, A. (2018). Ethics are admin: Australian human research ethics review forms as (un)ethical actors. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Wolfgang, J. D. (2016). Opening the marketplace: a case for the protection of anonymous online comments. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.85-103. New York: Peter Lang. Yanow, D. & Schwart-Shea, P. (2018). Framing "Deception" and "Covertness" in Research: Do Milgram, Humphreys, and Zimbardo Justify Regulating Social Science Research Ethics? Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018.




https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/019722499128538

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/019722499128538








130

ORIGINAL, INNOVATIVE AND CHANGING OF METHODS


131

20. Original, innovative and changing of methods The original, innovative and changing of methods-category contains literature that focuses on new ways of using methodologies, new theories or new philosophical considerations. This also means that research that focuses on new and/or uprising technologies, cultural phenomena, social developments, etc., reside within this category. In this category, you will find researchers such as Justin Clemens and Adam Nash (2018), Jérôme Béranger (2018) and Charles Ess (2015), and many others. Albrechtslund, A. (2008). Online social networking as participatory surveillance. First Monday, 13(3). Accessed: 02-10-2018. Amazeen, M. A. & O’Sullivan-Gavin, S. (2016). “Rogue” advertising in the digital age: creative reputation building or industry irresponsibility? In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.123-137. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Barker, J. & Weller, S. (2003). “Is it fun?” Developing children centered research methods. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23(1/2), pp.33–58. Beavers, A. F. (2012). Could and should the ought disappear from ethics? In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.197-209. New York: Peter Lang. Bechmann, A. (2014). Non-informed consent cultures: privacy policies and app contracts on Facebook. Journal of media business studies, 11(1), pp.21-38. Accessed: 02-10-2018. Béranger, J. (2018). Ethics at the Service of Digital Technology. In Béranger, J. (2018). The Algorithmic Code of Ethics, pp.1-53. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Béranger, J. (2018). The Code is Ethics and Ethics is the Code. In Béranger, J. (2018). The Algorithmic Code of Ethics - Ethics at the Bedside of the Digital Revolution, pp.55-120. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Berry, D. M. (2004). Internet research: privacy, ethics and alienation: an open source approach. Internet Research, 14(4), pp.323–332. Beyi, W. A. (2018). The Trilogy of a Digital Communication between the Real Man, his Digital Individual and the Market of the Digital Economy. SocioEconomic Challenges, 2(2) (pp.66-74), Sumy State University. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Blair, K. & Tulley, C. (2007). Whose research is it, anyway?: the challenge of developing feminist methodology in technological spaces. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.303-317. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Bond, E. & Agnew, S. (2016). Towards an innovative inclusion: using digital methods with young people. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital








132

Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.190-205. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Boyd, D. & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, communication & society, 15(5), pp.662-679. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Chess, S. (2016). Not your mother’s video game: the role of motherhood in video game advertising. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.295-307. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Clark, A. (2011). Breaking methodological boundaries? Exploring visual, participatory methods with adults and young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), pp.321-330. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Clemens, J. & Nash, A. (2018). Irremediability. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.29-60. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Cox, S. M. (2016). From adversaries to allies: ethical review in the context of visual and other innovative methods. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.251-262. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Davidson, J., Paulus, T. & Jackson, K. (2016). Speculating on the Future of Digital Tools for Qualitative Research. Qualitative inquiry, 22(7), pp.606-610. DePew, K. (2007). Through the eyes of researchers, rhetors, and audiences: triangulating data from the digital writing situation. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.49-69. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Diara, F. (2019). Cultural Heritage Digital Data: Future and Ethics. In Kremers, H. (2019). Digital Cultural Heritage. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Diebel-Fischer, H. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age: Fundamentals and Problems. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.7-21. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Doyle, E. (2017). Embracing qualitative research: a visual model for nuanced research ethics oversight. Qualitative research, 17(1), pp.95-117. Accessed: 28-09-2018. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). A New Paradigm for News. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.11-36. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.









133

Ess, C. (2015). New selves, new research ethics? In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.48-76. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Evans, H., Ginnis, S. & Bartlett, J. (2015). #SocialEthics: a guide to embedding ethics in social media research. Accessed: 09-10-2018. Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), pp.553-565. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Ford, H. (2014). Big Data and Small: Collaborations between ethnographers and data scientists. Big Data & Society, 1(2), pp.1-3. Fourie, P. J. (2017). Normative media theory in the digital media landscape: from media ethics to ethical communication. Communication, 43(2) (pp.109-127), Informa UK Limited. Accessed: 16-09-2019. Frohmann, B. (2018). Foucault, Deleuze, and the Ethics of Digital Networks. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (2018). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.57-68. Wilhelm Fink. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Fuchs, C. (2018). “Dear Mr. Neo-Nazi, Can You Please Give Me Your Informed Consent So That I Can Quote Your Fascist Tweet?“. Questions of Social Media Research Ethics in Online Ideology Critique. In Meikle, G. (Ed.) (2018). The Routledge Companion to Media and Activism, pp.385-394. Abingdon: Routledge. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Gallagher, John R. (2019). A Pedagogy of Ethical Interface Production Based on Virtue Ethics. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics - Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.69-84. New York: Routledge. Giesinger, J. (2019). Vulnerability and autonomy – children and adults. Ethics and social welfare, 13(3), pp.215-229. Accessed: 09-12-2019. Gil de Zúñiga, H. & Diehl, T. (2017). Citizenship, Social Media, and Big Data. Social science computer review, 35(1), pp.3-9. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Guryanova, A. V., Smotrova, I. V., Makhovikov, A. E. & Koychubaev, A. S. (2019). Socio-ethical Problems of the Digital Economy: Challenges and Risks. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (pp.96-102), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Hagen, L. (2017). Overcoming the Privacy Challenges of Wearable Devices. Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research - dg.o '17, ACM Press. Accessed: 16-09-2019. Halford, S. (2017). The Ethical Disruptions of Social Media Data: Tales from the Field. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.13-25.
















134

Hestres, L. E. (2016). The emerging ethics of digital political strategists. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.172-185. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Hewson, C. (2016). Ethics issues in digital methods research. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.206-221. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Higgins, M. (2014). Rebraiding photovoice: Methodological métissage at the cultural interface. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 43(2), pp.208-217. Highfield, T. & Leaver, T. (2015). A methodology for mapping Instagram hashtags. First Monday, 20(1), pp.1-11. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hoel, T., Griffiths, D. & Chen, W. (2017). The influence of data protection and privacy frameworks on the design of learning analytics systems. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, pp.243-252. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hong, S. (2018). Surveillance, sensors, and knowledge through the machine. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.137-155. London: Routledge. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Hoser, B. & Nitschke, T. (2010). Questions on ethics for research in the virtually connected world. Social Networks, 32, pp.180–186. Hultman, K. & Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 23(5), pp.525-542. Jane, E. A. (2015). Flaming? what flaming? the pitfalls and potentials of researching online hostility. Ethics and Information Technology, 17(1), pp.65-87. Jirotka, M., Grimpe, B., Stahl, B., Eden, G. & Hartswood, M. (2017). Responsible Research and Innovation in the Digital Age. Communications of the ACM, 60(5), pp.62-69. Klassen, L. (2016). Research by artists: critically integrating ethical frameworks. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.237-250. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Knox, J. (2016). What’s the matter with MOOCs? Socio-material methodologies for educational research. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.175-189. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.






135

Larsen, M. C. & Glud, L. N. (2013). Nye medier, nye metoder, nye etiske udfordringer. Metode & Forskningsdesign, 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Mai, J. (2016). Personal information as communicative acts. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(1), pp.51-57. Markham, A. N. (2018). Afterword: Ethics as Impact—Moving From Error-Avoidance and Concept-Driven Models to a Future-Oriented Approach. Social media and society, 4(3). Markham, A. (2012). Fabrication as ethical practice: qualitative inquiry in ambiguous internet contexts. Information, Communication and Society, 15(3), pp.334-353. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Markham, A. N. (2016). From using to sharing: a story of shifting fault lines in privacy and data protection discourse. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.189-206. New York: Peter Lang. Markham, A. N. (2018). Taking the methods classroom to the streets: Using reflexive qualitative methods to find the better questions for building data literacy. Qualitative Inquiry. Markham, A. N. (2005). The methods, politics, and ethics of representation in online ethnography. In Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.) (2005). The sage handbook of qualitative research, 3, pp.793-820. Sage. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2017). Research ethics in context: Decision making in digital research. In Schäfer, M. T. & van Es, K. (Eds.) (2017). The Datafied Society: Studying culture through data, pp.201-209. Amsterdam University Press B.V. McGeeney, E. (2015). Live tweeting and building the digital archive; #NFQLR – who and what is it for? International journal of social research methodology, 18(3), pp.307-319. McLeod, K. & Guillemin, M. (2016). The impact of photographs on the researcher: an ethical matter for visual research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.89-100. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. McQuillan, D. (2018). People’s councils for ethical machine learning. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Mutlu, C. E. (2015). Of Algorithms, Data and Ethics: A Response to Andrew Bennett. Millennium, 43(3), pp.998-1002. Nissenbaum, H. (2011). A contextual approach to privacy online. Daedalus, 140(4), pp.32-48. Palys, T. & Atchison, C. (2012). Qualitative Research in the Digital Era: Obstacles and Opportunities. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 11(4), pp.352-367.






136

Pascoe, J. C. (2012). Studying young people's new media use: Methodological shifts and educational innovations. Theory into Practice, 51(2), pp.76-82. Pink, S. (2017). Technologies, possibilities, emergence and an ethics of responsibility: refiguring techniques. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.1-12. Pink, S. & Lanzeni, D. (2018). Future anthropology ethics and datafication: temporality and responsibility in research. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Pittman, M. & Sheehan, K. (2017). Ethics of using online commercial crowdsourcing sites for academic research: the case of Amazon’s mechanical Turk. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.177-186. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Proctor, D. (2018). Cybernetic animism. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.227-241. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Quinton, S. & Reynolds, N. (2017). The Changing Roles of Researchers and Participants in Digital and Social Media Research: Ethics Challenges and Forward Directions . In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.53-78. Reich, J. A. (2015). Old methods and new technologies: Social media and shifts in power in qualitative research. Ethnography, 16(4), pp.394-415. Roock, R. D., Bhatt, I. & Adams, J. (2016). Video analysis in digital literacy studies: exploring innovative methods. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.105-121. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Sapienza, F. (2007). Ethos and research positionality in studies of virtual communities. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.89-106. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Schaer, P. (2017). Living labs – an ethical challenge for researchers and platform operators. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.167-176. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Schwartz, M. (2018). Thrownness, vulnerability, care. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.81-99. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019.









137

Schwarz, J. A. (2018). Umwelt and individuation. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.61-80. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Schweitzer, L. A. & Afzalan, N. (2017). Four Reasons Why AICP Needs an Open Data Ethic. American Planning Association. Journal of the American Planning Association, 83(2), pp.161-167. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Servida, F. & Casey, E. (2019). IoT forensic challenges and opportunities for digital traces. Digital Investigation, 28. Elsevier BV. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Sicart, M. (2012). Instrumental play of the moral risks of gamification. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.210-230. New York: Peter Lang. Smith, B. (2007). Researching hybrid literacies: methodological explorations of “ethnography” and the practices of the cybertariat. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.127-149. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Kofoed, J. & Staunæs, D. (2015). Hesitancy as ethics. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Methodology, 6(1), pp.24-39. Tedder, V. (2016). Digital stories and handmade skills: explorations in how digital methods can be used to study transmissions of skill. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.157-170. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Waters, P. & Waite, S. (2016). Toward an ecological approach to ethics in visual research methods with children. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.117-127. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Watley, E. (2016). Race, gender, and digital media: the mis-adventures of awkward black girl and the representations of black female identity. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.248-263. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Weller, K. (2015). Accepting the challenges of social media research. Online Information Review, 39(3), pp.281-289. Wyatt, S. (2012). Ethics of e-Research in social sciences and humanities. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.5-20. New York: Peter Lang.

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315107479/chapters/10.4324/9781315107479-3¨





138

Zwitter, A. (2014). Big Data ethics. Big Data & Society, 1(2). Accessed: 26-09-2018.



139

PARTICIPA-TORY METHODS


140

21. Participatory methods Participatory surveillance, participatory methods, participant-produced archives, participating children, online participation, participant anonymity and observation: we can use our participants for many things, and as a result, there are many challenges to consider. The researchers in this category all focus on how to collect data using participatory methods and how meet the ethical challenges that they encounter. Like many of the other categories, this too is many faceted. Since participatory methods involves the collection of data using human beings, we need to be vigilant of our behavior and our data treatment. Aarsand, P. & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing children's corporeal privacy: ethnographic video recording as material-discursive practice. Qualitative research, 10(2), pp.249-268. Addison, J. (2007). Mobile technologies and phenomenology of literacy. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.171-183. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Albrechtslund, A. (2008). Online social networking as participatory surveillance. First Monday, 13(3). Accessed: 02-10-2018. Allen, L. (2009). "Snapped": Researching the sexual cultures of schools using visual methods. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 22(5), pp.549-561. Bakardjieva, M., Feenberg, A. & Goldie, J. (2004). User-centered internet research: the ethical challenge. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.338-350. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Balmer, C., Griffiths, F. & Dunn, J. (2015). A review of the issues and challenges involved in using participant-produced photographs in nursing research. Journal of advanced nursing, 71(7), pp.1726-1737. Banister, S. (2007). Ethical issues and qualitative methods in the 21st century: how can digital technologies be embraced in the research community? Journal of Ethnographic and Qualitative Research, 1, pp.1-10. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Berry, D. M. (2004). Internet research: privacy, ethics and alienation: an open source approach. Internet Research, 14(4), pp.323–332. Blair, K. & Tulley, C. (2007). Whose research is it, anyway?: the challenge of developing feminist methodology in technological spaces. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.303-317. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Bolt, B. (2016). Whither the aesthetic alibi: ethics and the challenge of art as research in the academy. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and





141

Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.187-199. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Burkholder, C. & MacEntee, K. (2016). Exploring the ethics of the participant-produced archive: the complexities of dissemination. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.211-224. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Carpenter, K. J. & Dittrich, D. (2012). Bridging the distance: Removing the technology buffer and seeking consistent ethical analysis in computer security research. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.39-58. New York: Peter Lang. Clark, A. (2011). Breaking methodological boundaries? Exploring visual, participatory methods with adults and young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), pp.321-330. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Dennen, V. P. (2012). When public words are not data. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.21-38. New York: Peter Lang. Dickens, L. & Butcher, M. (2016). Going public? Re-thinking visibility, ethics and recognition through participatory research praxis. Transaction of the institute of British Geographers, 41(4) pp.528–540. Donoghue, G. & Miller, E. (2016). ‘I understand. I am a participant’: navigating the ‘fuzzy’ boundaries of visual methods in qualitative longitudinal research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.129-139. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Eckhoff, A. (2015). Ethical considerations of children's digital image-making and image-audiancing in early childhood environments. Early Child Development and Care, 185(10), pp.1617-1628. Edmonds, F., Evans, M., McQuire, S. & Chenhall, R. (2016). Ethical considerations when using visual methods in digital storytelling with aboriginal young people in Southeast Australia. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.171-184. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Ferguson, R. D. (2017). Negotiating consent, compensation and privacy in internet research. ParentsLikeMe.com as a case study. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.269-275. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Fiesler, C. & Proferes, N. (2018). “Participant” perceptions of twitter research ethics. Social media + society. Accessed: 14-10-2019.







142

Flicker, S., Haans, D. & Skinner, H. (2012). Ethical Dilemmas in Research on Internet Communities. In Hughes, J. (2012). Sage Library of Research Methods: SAGE internet research methods, pp.221-232. London: Sage. Geisler, C. & Slattery, S. (2007). Capturing the activity of digital writing: using, analyzing, and supplementing video screen capture. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.185-200. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Gubrium, A., Fiddian-Green, A. & Hill, A. (2016). Conflicting aims and minimizing harm: uncovering experiences of trauma in digital storytelling with young women. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.157-170. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Gubrium, A. C., Hill, A.L. & Flicker, S. (2014). A Situated Practice of Ethics for Participatory Visual and Digital Methods in Public Health Research and Practice: A Focus on Digital Storytelling. American Journal of Public Health 104 (9), pp.1606-1614. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Guest, C. (2016). Cultivating reflexive research practice when using participants’ photographs as research data. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.75-87. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Hannes, K. & Parylo, O. (2014). Let’s Play It Safe: Ethical Considerations from Participants in a Photovoice Research Project. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13, pp.255-275. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hart-Davidson, W. (2007). Studying the mediated action of composing with time-use diaries. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.153-170. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Higgins, M. (2014). Rebraiding photovoice: Methodological métissage at the cultural interface. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 43(2), pp.208-217. Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N. J. & Hillman, A. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people's engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 17(3), pp.360-375. Jadue Roa, D. S. (2017). Ethical issues in listening to young children in visual participatory research. International journal of inclusive education, 21(3), pp.332-345. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Jung, H. (2016). Fuzzy boundaries when using “mental mapping” methods to trade the experiences of immigrant women in South Korea. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. &









143

Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.31-44. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Kelly, A. R. (2016). Emerging genres of science communication and their ethical exigencies. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.3-18. New York: Peter Lang. Klassen, L. (2016). Research by artists: critically integrating ethical frameworks. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.237-250. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. King, S. A. (1996). Researching Internet Communities: Proposed Ethical Guidelines for the Reporting of Results. The Information Society, 12(2), pp.119-128. Kosinski, M., Matz, S. C., Gosling, S. D., Popov, V. & Stillwell, D. (2015). Facebook as a research tool for the social sciences: Opportunities, challenges, ethical considerations, and practical guidelines. The American psychologist, 70(6), pp.543-556. Krug, M. & Heuser, S. (2018). Ethics in the field: research practice in audio-visual studies. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018. Lenette, C. (2017). Using digital storytelling in participatory research with refugee women. London: SAGE. Lindgren, A. (2012). Ethical issues in pedagogical documentation: Representations of children through digital technology. International Journal of Early Childhood, 44(3), pp.327-340. Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge. Mannay, D. (2016). The politics of visibility, voice and anonymity: ethically disseminating visual research findings without the pictures. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.225-235. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. McLeod, K. & Guillemin, M. (2016). The impact of photographs on the researcher: an ethical matter for visual research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.89-100. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Monks, H., Cardoso, P., Papageorgiou, A., Carolan, C., Costello, L. & Thomas, L. (2015). Young people's views regarding participation in mental health and wellbeing research through social media. International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(1), pp.4-19. Accessed: 26-09-2018.





144

Mullins, M. & Doyle, E. (2010). Establishing a research ethics committee in a business school: a chairperson’s perspective. Research ethics, 6(4). Nansen, B., Wilken, R., Kennedy, J., Arnold, M. & Gibbs, M. (2016). Methodological and ethical concerns associated with digital ethnography in domestic environments: participant burden and burdensome technologies. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.45-59. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Nebeker, C. (2015). A multi-case study of research using mobile imaging, sensing and tracking technologies to objectively measure behavior: ethical issues and insights to guide responsible research practice. Journal of Research Administration, 46(1), pp.118-137. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R. & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). E-Research: Ethics, Security, Design, and Control in Psychological Research on the Internet. Journal of social issues, 58(1), pp.161–176. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Pilcher, K. (2016). Issues of collaboration, representation, meaning and emotions: utilising participant-led visual diaries to capture the everyday lives of people in mid to later life. International journal of social research methodology, 19(6), pp.677-692. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Pittman, M. & Bivins, T. (2016). Just war craft: virtue ethics and DotA. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.91-106. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Quinton, S. & Reynolds, N. (2017). The Changing Roles of Researchers and Participants in Digital and Social Media Research: Ethics Challenges and Forward Directions . In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.53-78. Richardson, L. (2018). Ethical Challenges in Digital Public Archaeology. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology, 1(1) (pp.64-73), Ubiquity Press, Ltd. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Robson, S. (2011). Producing and using video data in the early years: Ethical questions and practical consequences in research with young children. Children & Society, 25(3), pp.179-189. Robson, J. (2017). Participant anonymity and participant observations: situating the researcher within digital ethnography. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.195-202. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Rogers, R., Labadie, M. & Pole, K. (2016). Balancing voice and protection in literacy studies with young children. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 16(1), pp.34-59.











145

Sapienza, F. (2007). Ethos and research positionality in studies of virtual communities. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.89-106. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Shatzer, M. J. & Lindlof, T. R. (1998). Media ethnography in virtual space: Strategies, limits, and possibilities. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42(2), pp.170-189. Townsend, L. & Wallace, C. (2016). Social media research: A guide to ethics. Accessed: 24-09-2018. Vaughan, C. (2016). Different lenses: navigating ethics in cross-cultural research using photovoice. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.19-30. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Warr, D., Waycott, J., Guillemin, M. & Cox, S. (2016). Ethical issues in visual research and the value of stories from the field. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.1-16. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Waycott, J., Davis, H., Warr, D., Edmonds, F. & Taylor, G. (2017). Co-constructing Meaning and Negotiating Participation: Ethical Tensions when ‘Giving Voice’ through Digital Storytelling. Interact Computers, 29(2), pp.237-247. Wilesa, R., Coffey, A., Robinson, J. & Heath, S. (2012). Anonymisation and visual images: issues of respect, ‘voice’ and protection. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15(1), pp.41–53. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Wyatt, S. (2012). Ethics of e-Research in social sciences and humanities. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.5-20. New York: Peter Lang. Yang, K. H. (2015). Voice, authenticity and ethical challenges: the participatory dissemination of youth-generated visual data over social media. Visual studies, 30(3), pp.309-318. Zenkov, K., Ewaida, M., Lynch, M. R., Bell, A., Harmon, J., Pellegrino, A. & Sell, C. (2014). Shooting back and "looking for life" in the USA and Haiti: "seeing" the ethics of visual research methods through a development lens. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 37(1), pp.63-86.





146

PRIVACY


147

22. Privacy More than ever, we need to be vigilant when ensuring the privacy of our research participants. However, this is becoming increasingly difficult, which researchers like Christian Fuchs (2018) experienced when doing qualitative online research, and collecting data from White supremacists. The question of whether or not to collect informed consent is risen and discussed, with several considerations in mind – to ensure the privacy of the white supremacist if necessary and simultaneously ensuring the safety of himself. Privacy is many-faceted, which you can learn much more about in this category. Aarsand, P. & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing children's corporeal privacy: ethnographic video recording as material-discursive practice. Qualitative research, 10(2), pp.249-268. Ahmed, W., Bath, P. A. & Demartini, G. (2017). Using Twitter as a Data Source: An Overview of Ethical, Legal and Methodological Challenges. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.79-107. Akpojivi, U. (2017). Rethinking information privacy in a “connected” world. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.268-285. Information Science Reference (ISR). Andrews, T., Dyson, L. E. & Wishart, J. (2015). Advancing ethics frameworks and scenario-based learning to support educational research into mobile learning. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 38(3), pp.320-334. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Anthony, M. G. & Thomas, R. J. (2016). “The classroom is NOT a sacred space”: revisiting citizen journalism and surveillance in the digital classroom. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.29-43. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Arshad, H., Jantan, A. & Omolara, E. (2019). Evidence collection and forensics on social networks: Research challenges and directions. Digital Investigation, 28 (pp.126-138), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Bakardjieva, M. & Feenberg, A. (2001). Involving the Virtual Subject. Ethics and information technology, 2(4), pp.233-240. Accessed: 13-11-2019. Bakioǧlu, B. S. (2016). When the inmates run the asylum: grief play in the virtual panopticon of second life. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.141-163. New York: Peter Lang. Banister, S. (2007). Ethical issues and qualitative methods in the 21st century: how can digital technologies be embraced in the research community? Journal of Ethnographic and Qualitative Research, 1, pp.1-10. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Barocas, S. & Nissenbaum, H. (2014). Big data's end run around procedural privacy protections. Communications of the ACM, 57(11), pp.31-33.





https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A%3A1011454606534




148

Bechmann, A. (2014). Non-informed consent cultures: privacy policies and app contracts on Facebook. Journal of media business studies, 11(1), pp.21-38. Accessed: 02-10-2018. Bechmann, A. & Vahlstrup, P.B. (2015). Studying Facebook and Instagram data: The digital footprints software. First Monday, 20(12), 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Bennett, L., Chin, B. & Jones, B. (2016). Between ethics, privacy, fandom, and social media: new trajectories that challenge media producer/fan relations. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.107-122. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Béranger, J. (2018). The framework for algorithmic processing. In Béranger, J. (2018). The Algorithmic Code of Ethics - Ethics at the Bedside of the Digital Revolution, pp.55-120. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Berry, D. M. (2004). Internet research: privacy, ethics and alienation: an open source approach. Internet Research, 14(4), pp.323–332. Blom, R. (2017). Naming crime suspects in the news: “Seek the truth and report it” vs. “Minimizing harm”. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.207-226. Information Science Reference (ISR). Bruckman, A. (2002). Studying the Amateur Artist: A Perspective on Disguising Data Collected in Human Subjects Research on the Internet. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.217-231. Accessed: 13-11-2019. Bruns, A. & Burgess, J. (2016). Methodological innovation in precarious spaces: the case of Twitter. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.17-33. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Brunton, F. & Nissenbaum H. (2013). Political and Ethical Perspectives on Data Obfuscation. In Hildebrandt, M. & de Vries, K. (2013). Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn, pp.164-188. New York: Routledge. Brügger, N. (2017). Webraries and Web Archives: The Web between public and private. In Evans, W. & Baker, D. (Eds.) (2017). The End of Wisdom?: The Future of Libraries in a Digital Age, pp.185–190. Oxford: Chandos Publishing. Buchanan, E. A. & Zimmer, M. (2013). Internet research ethics. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.) (2013). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Carpenter, K. J. & Dittrich, D. (2012). Bridging the distance: Removing the technology buffer and seeking consistent ethical analysis in computer security research. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.39-58. New York: Peter Lang.









149

Clark, A. (2011). Breaking methodological boundaries? Exploring visual, participatory methods with adults and young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), pp.321-330. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Clark, D. (2004). What if you meet face to face? A case study in virtual/material research ethics. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.246-261. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Clark, L. S. (2016). The ethics of engagement: considering digital ethics in a critical participatory action research project with urban youth. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.167-187. New York: Peter Lang. Condie, J., Lean, G. & Wilcockson, B. (2017). The Trouble with Tinder: The Ethical Complexities of Researching Location-Aware Social Discovery Apps. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.135-158. Davisson, A. (2016). Passing around women’s bodies online: identity, privacy, and free speech on Reddit. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.44-57. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Dennen, V. P. (2012). When public words are not data. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.21-38. New York: Peter Lang. Derry, S. J, Pea, R. D., Barron, B., Engle, R. A., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., Hall, R., Koschmann, T., Lemke, J. L., Sherin, M. G. & Sherin, B. L. (2010) Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), pp.3-53. Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Privacy and Disclosure. In Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.116-135. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Elm, M. S. (2009). How do various notions of privacy influence decisions in qualitative internet research? In Markham, A. N. & Baym, N. (Eds.) (2009). Internet inquiry: conversations about method, pp.69-87. Sage Publications Ermann, D. M., Wlliams, M. B. & Shauf, M. S. (1997). Computers, Ethics, and Society. New York: Oxford University Press. Ess, C. (2014). Copying and distributing via Digital Media: Copyright, Copyleft, Global Perspectives. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics, 2, pp.84-119. Malden, Mass.: Polity. Eysenbach, G. & Till, J. E. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 323(7321), pp.1103-1105. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Ferguson, R. D. (2017). Negotiating consent, compensation and privacy in internet research. ParentsLikeMe.com as a case study. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.)








150

(2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.269-275. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Fernback, J. (2016). Privacy rights and data brokers: the ethics of a targeted surveillance regime. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.207. New York: Peter Lang. Flewitt, R. (2019). Ethics and researching young children’s digital literacy practices. In Erstad, O., Flewitt, R., Kümmerling-Meibauer, B. & Periera, I. S. P. (Eds.) (2019). The Routledge Handbook of Digital Literacies in Early Childhood, pp.64-78. London: Routledge. Flicker, S., Haans, D. & Skinner, H. (2012). Ethical Dilemmas in Research on Internet Communities. In Hughes, J. (Ed.) (2012). Sage Library of Research Methods: SAGE internet research methods, pp.221-232. London: SAGE. Fuchs, C. (2018). “Dear Mr. Neo-Nazi, Can You Please Give Me Your Informed Consent So That I Can Quote Your Fascist Tweet?“. Questions of Social Media Research Ethics in Online Ideology Critique. In Meikle, G. (Ed.) (2018). The Routledge Companion to Media and Activism, pp.385-394. Abingdon: Routledge. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Gillespie, R. (2016). Freedom, democracy, power, irony: the ethics of information and the networked fourth estate. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.58-73. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Grabowski, M. & Yeng, S. (2012). To post or not to post: philosophical and ethical considerations for mug shot websites. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.99-116. New York: Peter Lang. Hagen, L. (2017). Overcoming the Privacy Challenges of Wearable Devices. Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research - dg.o '17, ACM Press. Accessed: 16-09-2019. Halford, S. (2017). The Ethical Disruptions of Social Media Data: Tales from the Field. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.13-25. Hammer, M. J. (2017). Research ethics in big data. Oncology nursing forum, 44(3), pp.293-295. Hancock, J. T. (2019). The Ethics of Digital Research. In Welles, B. F. & González-Bailón, S. (Eds.) (2019). The Oxford Handbook of Networked Communication. London: Oxford University Press. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Hannes, K. & Parylo, O. (2014). Let’s Play It Safe: Ethical Considerations from Participants in a Photovoice Research Project. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13, pp.255-275. Accessed: 26-09-2018.









151

Harris, A. (2016). The ethics of researching images found online. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.61-73. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Hasselbach, G. & Tranberg, P. (2016). Data ethics – the new competitive advantage. Publishare. Hawkes, L. (2007). Impact of invasive web technologies on digital research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.337-351. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Highfield, T. & Leaver, T. (2015). A methodology for mapping Instagram hashtags. First Monday, 20(1), pp.1-11. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hoel, T., Griffiths, D. & Chen, W. (2017). The influence of data protection and privacy frameworks on the design of learning analytics systems. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, pp.243-252. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hoser, B. & Nitschke, T. (2010). Questions on ethics for research in the virtually connected world. Social Networks, 32, pp.180–186. Jadue Roa, D. S. (2017). Ethical issues in listening to young children in visual participatory research. International journal of inclusive education, 21(3), pp.332-345. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Kantanen, H. & Manninen, J. (2016). Hazy boundaries: virtual communities and research ethics. Media and communication, 4(4), pp.86-96. Kanuka, H. & Anderson, T. (2007). Ethical issues in qualitative e-learning research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. Accessed: 14-10-2019. Karppi, T. (2018). “The Computer Said So”: On the Ethics, Effectiveness, and Cultural Techniques of Predictive Policing. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Kelly, P., Marshall, S. J., Badland, H., Kerr, J., Oliver, M. & Doherty, A. R. et al. (2013). An Ethical Framework for Automated, Wearable Cameras in Health Behavior Research. American journal of preventive medicine, 44(3), pp.314-319. Accessed: 26-09-2018. King, S. A. (1996). Researching Internet Communities: Proposed Ethical Guidelines for the Reporting of Results. The Information Society, 12(2), pp.119-128. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer networks and online crimes. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.323-342. London: Springer.












152

Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethics, technology, and value. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.37-63. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethics and the professions. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.65-96. London: Springer. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Social context of computing. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.157-199. London: Springer. Larsen, M. C. & Glud, L. N. (2013). Nye medier, nye metoder, nye etiske udfordringer. Metode & Forskningsdesign, 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Lawson, D. (2004). Blurring the Boundaries: Ethical Considerations for Online Research Using Synchronous CMC Forums. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.80-100. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Lee, R. (2016). The Privacy Preferences of Americans. In Collmann, J. & Matei, S. A. (Eds.) (2016) Ethical Reasoning in Big Data - An Exploratory Analysis, pp.31-41. Springer. Legewie, N. & Nassauer, A. (2018). YouTube, Google, Facebook: 21st century online video research and research ethics. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018. Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge. Lomborg, S. (2013). Personal internet archives and ethics. Research Ethics, 9(1), pp.20-31. Lüders, M. (2015). Researching social media: Confidentiality, anonymity and reconstructing online practices. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.77-97. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D. & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical Use of Social Media to Facilitate Qualitative Research. Qualitative health research, 25(1), pp.99-109. Mai, J. (2016). Personal information as communicative acts. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(1), pp.51-57. Manderson, L., Davis, M., Colwell, C. & Ahlin, T. (2015). On Secrecy, Disclosure, the Public, and the Private in Anthropology. Current anthropology, 56(S12), pp.183-190. Mannay, D. (2016). The politics of visibility, voice and anonymity: ethically disseminating visual research findings without the pictures. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.225-235. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media Markham A. (2016). OKCupid data release fiasco: It’s time to rethink ethics education. Medium. Accessed: 18-06-2018.






153

Markham, A. (2012). Fabrication as ethical practice: qualitative inquiry in ambiguous internet contexts. Information, Communication and Society, 15(3), pp.334-353. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Markham, A. N. (2016). From using to sharing: a story of shifting fault lines in privacy and data protection discourse. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.189-206. New York: Peter Lang. Markham, A. N. (2017). Troubling the concept of data in digital qualitative research. In Flick, U. (Ed.) (2017). Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection, pp.511-523. London: Sage. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2015). Internet research: ethical concerns. In Wright, J. (Ed.) (2015). International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Science, 2, pp.606-613. Elsevier Science. Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2017). Research ethics in context: Decision making in digital research. In Schäfer, M. T. & van Es, K. (Eds.) (2017). The Datafied Society: Studying culture through data, pp.201-209. Amsterdam University Press B.V. Matzner, T. & Ochs, C. (2017). Sorting things out ethically: privacy as a research issue beyond the individual. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.39-52. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. McKee, H. A. & Porter, J. E. (2009). The ethics of internet research. A rhetorical, case-based process. New York: Peter Lang. McIntire-Strasburg, J. (2007). Multimedia research: difficult questions with indefinite answers. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.287-300. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Metcalf, J. & Crawford, K. (2016). Where are human subjects in Big Data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1), pp.1-14. Mok, T. M., Cornish, F. & Tarr, J. (2015). Too Much Information: Visual Research Ethics in the Age of Wearable Cameras. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral, 49, pp.309–322. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Monks, H., Cardoso, P., Papageorgiou, A., Carolan, C., Costello, L. & Thomas, L. (2015). Young people's views regarding participation in mental health and wellbeing research through social media. International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(1), pp.4-19. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Moreno, M. A., Goniu, N., Moreno, P. S. & Diekema, D. (2013). Ethics of Social Media Research: Common Concerns and Practical Considerations. Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking, 16(9), pp.708-713. Accessed: 26-09-2018.












154

Nebeker, C. (2015). A multi-case study of research using mobile imaging, sensing and tracking technologies to objectively measure behavior: Ethical issues and insights to guide responsible research practice. Journal of Research Administration, 46(1), pp.118-137. Nissenbaum, H. (2009). Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Nissenbaum, H. (2011). A contextual approach to privacy online. Daedalus, 140(4), pp.32-48. Nissenbaum, H. (2015). Respect for context as a benchmark for privacy online: what it is and isn't. In Moore, A. D. (Ed.) (2015). Privacy, security, and accountability: ethics, law and, policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R. & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). E-Research: Ethics, Security, Design, and Control in Psychological Research on the Internet. Journal of social issues, 58(1), pp.161–176. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Oravec, J. A. (2012). The ethics of sexting: issues involving consent and the production of intimate content. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.129-145. New York: Peter Lang. Pascalev, M. (2017). Privacy exchanges: Restoring consent in privacy self-management. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(1), pp.39-48. Prinsloo, P. & Slade, S. (2017). An elephant in the learning analytics room – the obligation to act. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, pp.46-55. Puurveen, G., Phinney, A., Cox, S. & Purves, B. (2016). Ethical considerations in the use of video observations in dementia end-of-life care research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.105-115. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Reidenberg, J. R. (2000). Resolving Conflicting International Data Privacy Rules in Cyberspace. Cyberspace and privacy: A new legal paradigm? 52(5), pp.1315-1376. Reilly, E. (2012). Shaping our shadow. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.117-126. New York: Peter Lang. Roberts, J. & Steiner, L. (2012). Ethics of citizen journalism sites. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.80-98. New York: Peter Lang. Robson, J. (2017). Participant anonymity and participant observations: situating the researcher within digital ethnography. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.195-202. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.






155

Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies: an introduction to researching with visual materials, pp.357-370. London: Sage Publications. Segadal, K. U. (2015). Possibilities and limitations of Internet research: A legal framework. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.35-47. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Sidler, M. (2007). Playing scavenger and gazer with scientific discourse: opportunities and ethics for online research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.71-86. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Singh, L. (2016). Data Ethics-Attaining Personal Privacy on the Web. In Collmann, J. & Matei, S. A. (Eds.) (2016). Ethical Reasoning in Big Data - An Exploratory Analysis, pp.81-90. Springer. Smart, J.C. (2016). Technology for Privacy Assurance. In Collmann, J. & Matei, S. A. (Eds.) (2016). Ethical Reasoning in Big Data - An Exploratory Analysis, pp.93-114. Springer. Sparks, H., Collins, F. L. & Kearns, R. (2016). Reflecting on the risks and ethical dilemmas of digital research. Geoforum, 77, pp.40-46. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Stevens, G., O'Donnell, V. L. & Williams, L. (2015). Public domain or private data? Developing an ethical approach to social media research in an inter-disciplinary project. Educational research and evaluation, 21(2), pp.154-167. Sugiura, L., Wiles, R. & Pope, C. (2016). Ethical challenges in online research: Public/private perceptions. Research Ethics, 13(3-4). Accessed: 14-10-2019. Sylvia IV, J. J. (2016). Little brother: how big data necessitates an ethical shift from privacy to power. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.13-28. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Tene, O. & Polonetsky, J. (2013). The theory of Creepy: Technology, Privacy and Shifting Social Norms. Yale JL & Tech. 16(59). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Townsend, L. & Wallace, C. (2016). Social media research: A guide to ethics. Accessed: 24-09-2018. Trottier, D. (2014). Big data ambivalence: visions and risks in practice. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.51-74. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Wang, Y. (2016). Big opportunities and big concerns of big data in education. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 60(4), pp.381-384. Whiteman, N. (2012). Undoing ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York: Springer.









156

Wildermuth, S. (2016). When privates are public: ethical issues in news media coverage of transgender people. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.202-215. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Wilesa, R., Coffey, A., Robinson, J. & Heath, S. (2012). Anonymisation and visual images: issues of respect, ‘voice’ and protection. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15(1), pp.41–53. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Williams, M. L., Burnap, P., Sloan, L., Jessop, C. & Lepps, H. (2017). Users’ View of Ethics in Social Media Research: Informed Consent, Anonymity and Harm. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.27-52. Wolfgang, J. D. (2016). Opening the marketplace: a case for the protection of anonymous online comments. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.85-103. New York: Peter Lang. Wyatt, S. (2012). Ethics of e-Research in social sciences and humanities. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.5-20. New York: Peter Lang. Yanow, D. & Schwart-Shea, P. (2018). Framing "Deception" and "Covertness" in Research: Do Milgram, Humphreys, and Zimbardo Justify Regulating Social Science Research Ethics? Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018. Zimmer M. (2016). OkCupid Study Reveals the Perils of Big-Data Science. Wired. Accessed: 14-06-2018. Zimmer, M. (2018). Addressing conceptual gaps in big data research ethics: an application of contextual integrity. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Zimmer, M. (2010). ‘But the data is already public’: on the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics and Information Technology, 12(4), pp.313–325. Accessed: 26-8-2018.








http://www.sfu.ca/~palys/Zimmer-2010-EthicsOfResearchFromFacebook.pdf


157

RISKY BUSINESS FOR RESEARCHERS


158

23. Risky business for researchers Not only do we need to consider our participants when collecting data, we also need to be aware of the ethical implications that we as researchers may encounter when going into the field. When we go about collecting data, we essentially represent our institutions as well as ourselves: our own integrity can become vulnerable and our institutions can receive to large fines if we do not follow the law such as General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). We consider the literature in this category as examples of how research can be risky business for researchers as well as for participants. Baalen, S. V. (2018). ‘Google wants to know your location’: The ethical challenges of fieldwork in the digital age. Research Ethics, 14(4) (pp.1-17), SAGE Publications. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Barratt, M. J. & Maddox, A. (2016). Active engagement with stigmatised communities through digital ethnography. Qualitative research, 16(6), pp.701-719. Bishop, L. & Gray, D. (2017). Ethical Challenges of Publishing and Sharing Social Media Research Data. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.159-187. Burnett, J., Chandler, S. & Lopez, J. (2007). A report from the digital contact zone: collaborative research and the hybridizing of cultural mindsets. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.319-336. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Clark, K., Duckham, M., Guillemin, M., Hunter, A., McVernon, J., O’Keefe, C., Pitkin, C., Prawer, S., Sinnott, R., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2018). Advancing the ethical use of digital data in human research: challenges and strategies to promote ethical practice. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(1) (pp.59-73), Springer Science and Business Media LLC. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Dieterle, B., Edwards, D. & Martin, P. D. (2019). Confronting Digital Aggression with an Ethics of Circulation. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.197-213. New York: Routledge. Ess, C. M. (2018). Afterword. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.264-227. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Ess, C. (2014). Copying and distributing via digital media: copyright, copyleft, global perspectives. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics, 2, pp.84-119. Malden, Mass.: Polity. Gelinas, L. & Kesselheim, J. C. (2018). Social media and pediatric research recruitment. (2018). In Kodish, E. & Nelson, R. M. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics and research with children: a case-based approach (2 ed.). Oxford University Press.







159

Ginnis, S. (2017). Where Next for #SocialEthics? In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.209-236. Gruwell, L. (2019). Feminist Research on the Toxic Web. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.87-103. New York: Routledge. Krug, M. & Heuser, S. (2018). Ethics in the field: research practice in audio-visual studies. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018. Lell, H. M. (2017). Human Rights and the Regulation of Anonymity. New Challenges to Law and Research. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.119-127. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Mascord, D. (2019). Law and ethics. In Hogarth, M. (2019). Writing Feature Articles - Print, Digital and Online, pp.252-260. London: Routledge. Massanari, A. L. (2018). Rethinking research ethics, power, and the risk of visibility in the “Alt-Right” gaze. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Menchen-Trevino, E. (2018). Digital Trace Data and Social Research. In Menchen-Trevino, E. (2018). The Oxford Handbook of Networked Communication, Oxford University Press. Nancarrow, C., Pallister, J. & Brace, I. (2001). A new research medium, new research populations and seven deadly sins for Internet researchers. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 4(3), pp.136-149. Nenadic, I. (2017). Journalists on Twitter: Reconfiguring Professional Identity, Reconsidering Research Ethics – The Case of Croatia. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.111-117. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Pittman, M. & Sheehan, K. (2017). Ethics of using online commercial crowdsourcing sites for academic research: the case of Amazon’s mechanical Turk. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.177-186. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Puschmann, C. (2017). Bad judgment, bad ethics? Validity in computational social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.95-113. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Rice, J. (2019). Professorial Outrage. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.123-140. New York: Routledge.









160

Quinton, S. & Reynolds, N. (2017). The Changing Roles of Researchers and Participants in Digital and Social Media Research: Ethics Challenges and Forward Directions. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.53-78. Reilly, C. & Eyman, D. (2007). Multifaceted methods for multimodal texts: alternate approaches to citation analysis for electronic sources. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.353-375. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Sparks, H., Collins, F. L. & Kearns, R. (2016). Reflecting on the risks and ethical dilemmas of digital research. Geoforum, 77, pp.40-46. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Townsend, L. & Wallace, C. (2017). The Ethics of Using Social Media Data in Research: A New Framework. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.189-207. Van den Hoonaard, W. C. (2018). Autobiographical notes from inside the ethics regime: some thoughts on how researchers in the social sciences can own ethics. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. E. (2015). Uncovering the challenges in collection, sharing and documentation: The hidden data of social media research?. In AAAI Workshop - Technical Report, pp.28-37. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. E. (2016). A manifesto for data sharing in social media research. Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Web Science, pp.166-172. New York NY: ACM. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (2017). To share or not to share? Ethical challenges in sharing social media-based research data. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.115-129. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.








161

SOFTWARE AND ALGORITHMS


162

24. Software and algorithms

Research in this category focus on the (non-eatable) cookies that follows us everywhere, the algorithms on social media which we may not truly understand, the hackers that know more about us than we would like them to and the ever evolving distrust and questioning of social media and digital technology. However, cookies can help us understand how users “move” across platforms and algorithms are recipes for problem solving. Researchers in this category focus on software and algorithms that are becoming increasingly a part of our lives. Alim, S. (2014). An initial exploration of ethical research practices regarding automated data extraction from online social media user profiles. First Monday, 19(7). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Bechmann, A. & Vahlstrup, P.B. (2015). Studying Facebook and Instagram data: The digital footprints software. First Monday, 20(12), 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Béranger, J. (2018). Ethics at the Service of Digital Technology. In Béranger, J. (2018). The Algorithmic Code of Ethics - Ethics at the Bedside of the Digital Revolution, pp.55-120. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Béranger, J. (2018). The Code is Ethics and Ethics is the Code. In Béranger, J. (2018). The Algorithmic Code of Ethics - Ethics at the Bedside of the Digital Revolution, pp.55-120. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Béranger, J. (2018). The framework for algorithmic processing. In Béranger, J. (2018). The Algorithmic Code of Ethics - Ethics at the Bedside of the Digital Revolution, pp.55-120. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Berry, D. M. (2004). Internet research: privacy, ethics and alienation: an open source approach. Internet Research, 14(4), pp.323–332. Butakov, S., Schherbinin, V., Diagilev, V. & Tskhay, A. (2019). Embedding plagiarism detection mechanisms into learning management systems. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.216-231. IGI Global. Condie, J., Lean, G. & Wilcockson, B. (2017). The Trouble with Tinder: The Ethical Complexities of Researching Location-Aware Social Discovery Apps. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.135-158. Davidson, J., Paulus, T. & Jackson, K. (2016). Speculating on the Future of Digital Tools for Qualitative Research. Qualitative inquiry, 22(7), pp.606-610. Gekker, A. (2012). Legionnaries of chaos: “anonymous” and governmental oversight of the internet. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.178-192. New York: Peter Lang.






163

Geisler, C. & Slattery, S. (2007). Capturing the activity of digital writing: using, analyzing, and supplementing video screen capture. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.185-200. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Hawkes, L. (2007). Impact of invasive web technologies on digital research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.337-351. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Johnson, J. D. (2017). Ethics, Agency, and Power. In Hess, A. & Davisson, A. (Eds.) (2017). Theorizing Digital Rhetoric, pp.196-208. New York: Routledge. Kelly, A. R. (2016). Emerging genres of science communication and their ethical exigencies. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.3-18. New York: Peter Lang. Kennedy, K. & Wilson, N. (2019). The banality of digital aggression. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.214-230. New York: Routledge. Kizza, J. M. (2007). Software issues: risks and liabilities. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.201-238. London: Springer. Langlois, G. (2018). Social media and the care of the self. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.156-170. London: Routledge. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Lunceford, B. (2016). Programs or people? Participation and the ethics of hacktivism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.77-90. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Magalhães, J. C. (2018). Do algorithms shape character? Considering algorithmic ethical subjectivation. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Menchen-Trevino, E. (2018). Digital Trace Data and Social Research. In Menchen-Trevino, E. (2018). The Oxford Handbook of Networked Communication, Oxford University Press. Mutlu, C. E. (2015). Of Algorithms, Data and Ethics: A Response to Andrew Bennett. Millennium, 43(3), pp.998-1002. Palys, T. & Atchison, C. (2012). Qualitative Research in the Digital Era: Obstacles and Opportunities. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 11(4), pp.352-367. Romberger, J. (2007). An ecofeminist methodology: studying the ecological dimensions of the digital environment. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing





164

research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.249-267. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Schuck, S. & Kearney, M. (2006). Using digital video as a research tool: Ethical issues for researchers. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(4), pp.447-463. Stroud, S. R. (2016). “Be a bully to beat a bully”: Twitter ethics, online identity, and the culture of quick revenge. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.264-278. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Weller, K. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (2017). To share or not to share? Ethical challenges in sharing social media-based research data. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.115-129. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Zenil, H. (2018). Digital and Computational Aspects of Human and AI Ethical Frameworks. MDPI AG. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Önacan, M. B. K., Uluag, M., Önel, T. & Medeni, T. D. (2019). Selection of plagiarism detection software and its integration into Moodle for universities: en example of open source software use in developing countries. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.200-215. IGI Global.



https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/201811.0054/v1


165

SURVEILLANCE


166

25. Surveillance Surveillance can be both good and bad – we can feel uneasy when surveyed by cameras or even by cookies online, and we can feel safer with the presence of them, knowing that if any harm was to come to us, it would be caught on camera. Researcher Anders Albrechtslund (2018) argue, that understandings of surveillance is often focused on disempowerment and control, whereas social media is a practice based on surveillance, and therefore more empowering than not. Other researchers, such as Sebastian van Baalen (2018), discuss the importance of assessing the risks of digital data collection when our location is no longer private. How researchers have experienced and researched surveillance as an asset, an interruption, and a positive and negative aspect is demonstrated in this category. Albrechtslund, A. (2008). Online social networking as participatory surveillance. First Monday, 13(3). Accessed: 02-10-2018. Albrechtslund, A. (2018). The Family Album: Emerging participatory surveillance practices of photo sharing. Cultures of participation, Aarhus, Denmark, pp.9. Baalen, S. V. (2018). ‘Google wants to know your location’: The ethical challenges of fieldwork in the digital age. Research Ethics, 14(4) (pp.1-17), SAGE Publications. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Brunton, F. & Nissenbaum H. (2013). Political and Ethical Perspectives on Data Obfuscation. In Hildebrandt, M. & de Vries, K. (2013). Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn, pp.164-188. New York: Routledge. Bøge, A. R. (2017). Review of Taylor and Rooney’s Surveillance Futures: Social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. Surveillance and society, 15(5), pp.701-703. Bøge, A. R. & Lauritsen, P. (2017). Reassembling Surveillance Creep. Akademisk Kvarter, 15, pp.27-39. Hong, S. (2018). Surveillance, sensors, and knowledge through the machine. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.137-155. London: Routledge. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Hope, A. (2017). World of Spycraft: video games, gamification and surveillance creep. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.162-173. Karppi, T. (2018). “The Computer Said So”: On the Ethics, Effectiveness, and Cultural Techniques of Predictive Policing. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.








167

Kennedy, K. & Wilson, N. (2019). The banality of digital aggression. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.214-230. New York: Routledge. Lee, M. & Crofts, T. (2017). Sexting and young people: surveillance and childhood sexuality. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.81-92. Light, B., Mitchell, P. & Wikström, P. (2018). Big data, method and the ethics of location: a case study of a hookup app for men who have sex with men. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lips, M. (2019). Citizen identity, privacy, ethics and security. In Lips, M. (2019). Digital Government - Managing Public Sector Reform in the Digital Era, pp.197-221. London: Routledge. Martinez-Martin, N., Insel, T. R., Dagum, P., Greely, H. T. & Cho, M. K. (2018). Data mining for health: staking out the ethical territory of digital phenotyping. Npj Digital Medicine, 1(1), Springer Nature. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Massanari, A. L. (2018). Rethinking research ethics, power, and the risk of visibility in the “Alt-Right” gaze. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Richardson, I., Hjorth, L., Strengers, Y. & Balmford, W. (2017). Careful surveillance at play: human-animal relations and mobile media in the home. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.105-116. Rooney, T. (2017). Spy kids too: encounters with surveillance through games and play. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.149-161. Servida, F. & Casey, E. (2019). IoT forensic challenges and opportunities for digital traces. Digital Investigation, 28. Elsevier BV. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Steeves, V. (2017). Terra cognita: surveillance of young people’s favourite websites. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.174-186. Taylor, E. & Rooney, R. (2017). Digital playgrounds: growing up in the surveillance age. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.1-16. Van Brakel, R. (2017). Rise of pre-emptive surveillance: unintended social and ethical consequences. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.187-199.









168

Williamson, B. (2017). Calculating children in the dataveillance school: personal and learning analytics. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.50-66.


169

THIRD-PARTY TRACKING


170

26. Third-party tracking This category highlights the perspectives of freedom and security in a surveillance-society. With the rising of digital forensics, we, and criminals in particular, may need to be even more vigilant of our online travels. Since our google searches and social media likes are no longer private, we may need to consider the positive- and negative effects of our digital use. Research focusing on the challenges and ethical implications of third-party tracking is listed in this category. Anthony, M. G. & Thomas, R. J. (2016). “The classroom is NOT a sacred space”: revisiting citizen journalism and surveillance in the digital classroom. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.29-43. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Bakioǧlu, B. S. (2016). When the inmates run the asylum: grief play in the virtual panopticon of second life. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.141-163. New York: Peter Lang. Fernback, J. (2016). Privacy rights and data brokers: the ethics of a targeted surveillance regime. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.207. New York: Peter Lang. Gillespie, R. (2016). Freedom, democracy, power, irony: the ethics of information and the networked fourth estate. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.58-73. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Humphreys, L. (2017). Locating locational data in mobile and social media. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.245-254. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Nissenbaum, H. (2011). A contextual approach to privacy online. Daedalus, 140(4), pp.32-48. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R. & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). E-Research: Ethics, Security, Design, and Control in Psychological Research on the Internet. Journal of social issues, 58(1), pp.161–176. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Oboler, A., Welsh, K. & Cruz, L. (2012). The danger of big data: Social media as computational social science. First Monday, 17(7). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Servida, F. & Casey, E. (2019). IoT forensic challenges and opportunities for digital traces. Digital Investigation, 28. Elsevier BV. Accessed: 03-09-2019.








171

VISUAL METHODS


172

27. Visual methods “Visual” can mean many things. In this context, we refer to video- or photo data, such as ethnographic video, snapchat images, virtual simulations, virtual worlds, participant photographs, photovoice, Instagram hashtags using photos, visual communication, YouTube and many other forms of visual methods. Researchers who use visual methods as data collection may encounter problems with anonymization and informed consent, which as an example is discussed by Nicolas Legewie and Anne Nassauer (2018) in their article about video research in the 21st century. Aarsand, P. & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing children's corporeal privacy: ethnographic video recording as material-discursive practice. Qualitative research, 10(2), pp.249-268. Abasi, A. R. & Taylor, M. C. (2007). Tackling the issues and challenges of using video data in adult literacy research. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 47(2), pp.289-307. Albrechtslund, A. (2018). The Family Album: Emerging participatory surveillance practices of photo sharing. Cultures of participation, Aarhus, Denmark, pp.9. Allen, L. (2009). "Snapped": Researching the sexual cultures of schools using visual methods. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 22(5), pp.549-561. Balmer, C., Griffiths, F. & Dunn, J. (2015). A review of the issues and challenges involved in using participant-produced photographs in nursing research. Journal of advanced nursing, 71(7), pp.1726-1737. Bancroft, A., Karels, M., Murray, Ó. M. & Zimpfer, J. (2014). Not being there: research at a distance with video, text and speech. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.137-154. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Barker, J. & Weller, S. (2003). “Is it fun?” Developing children centered research methods. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23(1/2), pp.33–58. Bolt, B. (2016). Whither the aesthetic alibi: ethics and the challenge of art as research in the academy. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.187-199. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Boydell, K. M., Solimine, C. & Jackson, S. (2016). Visually embodying psychosis: the ethics of performing difficult experiences. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.201-210. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Brooker, P., Barnett, J. Cribbin, T. & Sharma, S. (2016). Have we even solved the first ‘big data challenge’? Practical issues concerning data collection and visual representation for social media analytics. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.)


173

(2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.34-50. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Burkholder, C. & MacEntee, K. (2016). Exploring the ethics of the participant-produced archive: the complexities of dissemination. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.211-224. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Burnett, J., Chandler, S. & Lopez, J. (2007). A report from the digital contact zone: collaborative research and the hybridizing of cultural mindsets. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.319-336. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Chan, S. (2013). Using videos and multimodal discourse analysis to study how students learn a trade. International Journal of Training Research, 11(1), 69-78. Chari, T. (2017). Ethical pitfalls in the digital age: when the desire to “serve hot” gets in the way of verification. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.25-43. Information Science Reference (ISR). Chess, S. (2016). Not your mother’s video game: the role of motherhood in video game advertising. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.295-307. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Clark, A. (2011). Breaking methodological boundaries? Exploring visual, participatory methods with adults and young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), pp.321-330. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Clark, A. (2013). Haunted by Images? Ethical Moments and Anxieties in Visual Research. Methodological Innovations Online, 8(2), pp.68–81. Cook, T. & Hess, E. (2007). “What the camera sees and from whose perspective: Fun methodologies for engaging children in enlightening adults”. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 14(1), pp.29-45. Cox, S., Drew, S., Guillemin, M., Howell, C., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2014). Guidelines for ethical visual research methods. Melbourne Social Equity Institute. Accessed: 09-10-2018. Cox, S. M. (2016). From adversaries to allies: ethical review in the context of visual and other innovative methods. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.251-262. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.129-139. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.






174

Cutter-Mackenzie, A., Edwards, S. & Quinton, H.W. (2015). Childframed video research methodologies: issues, possibilities and challenges for researching with children. Children's Geographies, 13(3), pp.343-356. Davidson, J., Dottin, J. W., Penna, S. L. & Robertson, S. P. (2009). Visual sources and the qualitative research dissertation: Ethics, evidence and the politics of academia--moving innovation in higher education from the center to the margins. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 10(27). Derry, S. J, Pea, R. D., Barron, B., Engle, R. A., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., Hall, R., Koschmann, T., Lemke, J. L., Sherin, M. G. & Sherin, B. L. (2010) Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), pp.3-53. Dickens, L. & Butcher, M. (2016). Going public? Re-thinking visibility, ethics and recognition through participatory research praxis. Transaction of the institute of British Geographers, 41(4) pp.528–540. Donoghue, G. & Miller, E. (2016). ‘I understand. I am a participant’: navigating the ‘fuzzy’ boundaries of visual methods in qualitative longitudinal research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.129-139. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Doyle, E. (2017). Embracing qualitative research: a visual model for nuanced research ethics oversight. Qualitative research, 17(1), pp.95-117. Accessed: 28-09-2018. Dube, B. (2017). To lie or not to lie: interrogating codes of conduct on photo ethics in the era of digital technologies. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.44-63. Information Science Reference (ISR). Eckhoff, A. (2015). Ethical considerations of children's digital image-making and image-audiancing in early childhood environments. Early Child Development and Care, 185(10), pp.1617-1628. Edmonds, F., Evans, M., McQuire, S. & Chenhall, R. (2016). Ethical considerations when using visual methods in digital storytelling with aboriginal young people in Southeast Australia. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.171-184. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Falconer, L. (2013). Situated learning in virtual simulations: Researching the authentic dimension in virtual worlds. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 24(3), pp.285-300. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), pp.553-565. Accessed: 26-09-2018.







175

Geisler, C. & Slattery, S. (2007). Capturing the activity of digital writing: using, analyzing, and supplementing video screen capture. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.185-200. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Gray, B., Hilder, J., Macdonald, L., Tester, R., Dowell, A. & Stubbe, M. (2016). Are research ethics guidelines culturally competent? Research Ethics, 13 (1), pp.23-41. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Gubrium, A., Fiddian-Green, A. & Hill, A. (2016). Conflicting aims and minimizing harm: uncovering experiences of trauma in digital storytelling with young women. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.157-170. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Gubrium, A. C., Hill, A.L. & Flicker, S. (2014). A Situated Practice of Ethics for Participatory Visual and Digital Methods in Public Health Research and Practice: A Focus on Digital Storytelling. American Journal of Public Health 104 (9), pp.1606-1614. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Guest, C. (2016). Cultivating reflexive research practice when using participants’ photographs as research data. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.75-87. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Hand, M. (2014). Digitization and memory: researching practices of adaption to visual and textual data in everyday life. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.205-230. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Hannes, K. & Parylo, O. (2014). Let’s Play It Safe: Ethical Considerations from Participants in a Photovoice Research Project. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13, pp.255-275. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Harris, A. (2016). The ethics of researching images found online. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.61-73. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Higgins, M. (2014). Rebraiding photovoice: Methodological métissage at the cultural interface. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 43(2), pp.208-217. Highfield, T. & Leaver, T. (2015). A methodology for mapping Instagram hashtags. First Monday, 20(1), pp.1-11. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hilligoss, S. & Williams, S. (2007). Composition meets visual communication: new research questions. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.229-247. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.










176

Hinkson, M. (2017). At the edges of the visual culture of exile: a glimpse from South Australia. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.93-104. Howell, C., Cox, S., Drew, S., Guillemin, M., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2014). Exploring ethical frontiers of visual methods. Research ethics review, 10(4), pp.208-213. Hultman, K. & Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 23(5), pp.525-542. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hutchinson, E. (2016). Digital methods and perpetual reinvention? Asynchronous interviewing and photo elicitation. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.143-156. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Jadue Roa, D. S. (2017). Ethical issues in listening to young children in visual participatory research. International journal of inclusive education, 21(3), pp.332-345. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Jung, H. (2016). Fuzzy boundaries when using “mental mapping” methods to trade the experiences of immigrant women in South Korea. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.31-44. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Kelly, P., Marshall, S. J., Badland, H., Kerr, J., Oliver, M. & Doherty, A. R. et al. (2013). An Ethical Framework for Automated, Wearable Cameras in Health Behavior Research. American journal of preventive medicine, 44(3), pp.314-319. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Klassen, L. (2016). Research by artists: critically integrating ethical frameworks. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.237-250. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Krug, M. & Heuser, S. (2018). Ethics in the field: research practice in audio-visual studies. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018. Legewie, N. & Nassauer, A. (2018). YouTube, Google, Facebook: 21st century online video research and research ethics. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018. Lie, R. & Witteveen, L. (2017). Visual informed consent: informed consent without forms. International journal of social research methodology, 20(1), pp.63-75. Lindgren, A. (2012). Ethical issues in pedagogical documentation: Representations of children through digital technology. International Journal of Early Childhood, 44(3), pp.327-340.











177

Lodge, C. (2009). About face: Visual research involving children. Education 3-13, 37(4), pp.361-370. Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D. & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical Use of Social Media to Facilitate Qualitative Research. Qualitative health research, 25(1), pp.99-109. Lyon, D. (2016). Researching young people’s orientations to the future: the methodological challenges of using arts practice. Qualitative research, 16(4), pp.430-445. Mannay, D. (2016). The politics of visibility, voice and anonymity: ethically disseminating visual research findings without the pictures. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.225-235. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. McLeod, K. & Guillemin, M. (2016). The impact of photographs on the researcher: an ethical matter for visual research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.89-100. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media Melbourne Social Equity Institute. Moats, D. & Perriam, J. (2017). How does it feel to be visualized? In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.255-265. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Mok, T. M., Cornish, F. & Tarr, J. (2015). Too Much Information: Visual Research Ethics in the Age of Wearable Cameras. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral, 49, pp.309–322. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Mudaly, N. (2015). The rights of pre-verbal children involved in video-recorded research. An examination of the ethical issues. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 23, pp.391-404. Nansen, B., Wilken, R., Kennedy, J., Arnold, M. & Gibbs, M. (2016). Methodological and ethical concerns associated with digital ethnography in domestic environments: participant burden and burdensome technologies. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.45-59. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Nebeker, C. (2015). A multi-case study of research using mobile imaging, sensing and tracking technologies to objectively measure behavior: ethical issues and insights to guide responsible research practice. Journal of Research Administration, 46(1), pp.118-137. Neilson, T. (2018). Digital Media, Conventional Methods: Using Video Interviews to Study the Labor of Digital Journalism. In Levenberg, L., Neilsen, T. & Rheams, D. (Eds.) (2018). Research Methods for the Digital Humanities, pp.151-171. Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 09-09-2019.







178

Nielsen, L. Y. & Larsen, M. C. (2018). Metodiske tilgange til digital ungdomsforskning: Refleksioner over forskning i unges brug af weblogs og fotodelingsapplikationen Snapchat. I Pless, M. & Sørensen, N. U. (Red.). Ungeperspektiver: Tænkninger og tilgange i ungdomsforskningen, 7, pp.173-195. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Ungdomsliv. Oliver, J. (2019). Imagining technique: reflexivity, ethnographic arts and the digital-real. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.117-129. Pauwels, L. (2006). Ethical Issues of Online (Visual) Research. Visual Anthropology, 19, pp.365–369. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Pilcher, K. (2016). Issues of collaboration, representation, meaning and emotions: utilising participant-led visual diaries to capture the everyday lives of people in mid to later life. International journal of social research methodology, 19(6), pp.677-692. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Pink, S. (2017). Technologies, possibilities, emergence and an ethics of responsibility: refiguring techniques. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.1-12. Pittman, M. & Bivins, T. (2016). Just war craft: virtue ethics and DotA. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.91-106. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Pope, C.C., De Luca, R. & Tolich, M. (2010). How an exchange of perspectives led to tentative ethical guidelines for visual ethnography. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), pp.301-315. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Puurveen, G., Phinney, A., Cox, S. & Purves, B. (2016). Ethical considerations in the use of video observations in dementia end-of-life care research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and visual research methods: theory, methodology, and practice, pp.105-115. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Richardson, I., Hjorth, L., Strengers, Y. & Balmford, W. (2017). Careful surveillance at play: human-animal relations and mobile media in the home. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.105-116. Robson, S. (2011). Producing and using video data in the early years: Ethical questions and practical consequences in research with young children. Children & Society, 25(3), pp.179-189. Rogers, R. (2016). The harm of video games: the ethics behind regulating minors’ access to violent video games in light of the supreme court ruling. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.216-230. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Roock, R. D., Bhatt, I. & Adams, J. (2016). Video analysis in digital literacy studies: exploring innovative methods. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016).







179

Digital Methods for Social Science: an interdisciplinary guide to research innovation, pp.105-121. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies: an introduction to researching with visual materials, pp.357-370. London: Sage Publications. Schaarschmidt, N. (2017). Media Ethics in Research on Video-Based Mental Health Care. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.137-142. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Schuck, S. & Kearney, M. (2006). Using digital video as a research tool: Ethical issues for researchers. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(4), pp.447-463. Vaughan, C. (2016). Different lenses: navigating ethics in cross-cultural research using photovoice. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.19-30. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Völcker, M. & Bruns, A. (2018). Digital self-presentation: the subjective meaning of selfies for adolescents and young adults. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018. Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Warr, D., Waycott, J., Guillemin, M. & Cox, S. (2016). Ethical issues in visual research and the value of stories from the field. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.1-16. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Waters, P. & Waite, S. (2016). Toward an ecological approach to ethics in visual research methods with children. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.117-127. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Wilesa, R., Coffey, A., Robinson, J. & Heath, S. (2012). Anonymisation and visual images: issues of respect, ‘voice’ and protection. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15(1), pp.41–53. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Yang, K. H. (2015). Voice, authenticity and ethical challenges: the participatory dissemination of youth-generated visual data over social media. Visual studies, 30(3), pp.309-318. Young, A. & MacDowall, L. (2017). Visual documentation in hybrid spaces: ethics, publics and transition. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.81-91.






180

Zenkov, K., Ewaida, M., Lynch, M. R., Bell, A., Harmon, J., Pellegrino, A. & Sell, C. (2014). Shooting back and "looking for life" in the USA and Haiti: "seeing" the ethics of visual research methods through a development lens. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 37(1), pp.63-86.


181

VULNERABLE GROUPS


182

28. Vulnerable groups Suicide, homosexuality, secrecy, children, sexting, power exertion, bullies and the bullied, grief, transgender. The internet knows no boundaries: we can share everything online and we can google our way to any answer. Yet, some groups are more vulnerable than others online which means that the researchers need to act accordingly in their data collection endeavor. Researchers Ben Light, Peta Mitchell and Patrik Wikström (2018) reflect on their collection of data generated via an app specifically developed to facilitate public sex among men who have sex with men. In their study they argue, that ethical considerations are especially important in their field of research, where harassment, imprisonment, physical harm and death may occur. This category is dedicated to all those vulnerable groups that we may encounter when collecting data on digital platforms. Aarsand, P. & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing children's corporeal privacy: ethnographic video recording as material-discursive practice. Qualitative research, 10(2), pp.249-268. Albrechtslund, A. (2018). The Family Album: Emerging participatory surveillance practices of photo sharing. Cultures of participation, Aarhus, Denmark, pp.9. Barratt, M. J. & Maddox, A. (2016). Active engagement with stigmatised communities through digital ethnography. Qualitative research, 16(6), pp.701-719. Bassett, E. H. & O’Riordan, K. (2002). Ethics of Internet Research: Contesting the Human Subjects Research Model. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.233-247. Boydell, K. M., Solimine, C. & Jackson, S. (2016). Visually embodying psychosis: the ethics of performing difficult experiences. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.201-210. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Burkell, J. A. (2016). Remembering me: Big data, individual identity, and the psychological necessity of forgetting. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(1). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Carlson, C. R. (2016). Hashtags and hate speech: the legal and ethical responsibilities of social media companies to manage content online. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.123-140. New York: Peter Lang. Condie, J., Lean, G. & Wilcockson, B. (2017). The Trouble with Tinder: The Ethical Complexities of Researching Location-Aware Social Discovery Apps. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.135-158. Condis, M. (2019). Hateful Games. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.143-159. New York: Routledge.




183

Davisson, A. (2016). Passing around women’s bodies online: identity, privacy, and free speech on Reddit. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.44-57. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Eskisabel-Azpiazu, A., Cerezo-Menéndez, R. & Gayo-Avello, D. (2017). An ethical inquiry into youth suicide prevention using social media mining. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.227-234. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Eysenbach, G. & Till, J. E. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 323(7321), pp.1103-1105. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), pp.553-565. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Flicker, S., Haans, D. & Skinner, H. (2012). Ethical Dilemmas in Research on Internet Communities. In Hughes, J. (Ed.) (2012). Sage Library of Research Methods: SAGE internet research methods, pp.221-232. London: Sage. Fuchs, C. (2018). “Dear Mr. Neo-Nazi, Can You Please Give Me Your Informed Consent So That I Can Quote Your Fascist Tweet?“. Questions of Social Media Research Ethics in Online Ideology Critique. In Meikle, G. (Ed.) (2018). The Routledge Companion to Media and Activism, pp.385-394. Abingdon: Routledge. Accessed: 30-10-2018. Gelinas, L. & Kesselheim, J. C. (2018). Social media and pediatric research recruitment. (2018). In Kodish, E. & Nelson, R. M. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics and research with children: a case-based approach (2 ed.). Oxford University Press. Gelms, B.t (2019). Volatile Visibility. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.179-194. New York: Routledge. Geraghty, R. (2017). Curation After the Fact: Practical and Ethical Challenges of Archiving Legacy Evaluation Data. International Journal of Digital Curation, 12(1) (pp.152-161), Edinburgh University Library. Accessed: 12-09-2019. Giesinger, J. (2019). Vulnerability and autonomy – children and adults. Ethics and social welfare, 13(3), pp.215-229. Accessed: 09-12-2019. Gruwell, L. (2019). Feminist Research on the Toxic Web. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.87-103. New York: Routledge. Gubrium, A., Fiddian-Green, A. & Hill, A. (2016). Conflicting aims and minimizing harm: uncovering experiences of trauma in digital storytelling with young women. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods:









http://www.ijdc.net/article/view/550




184

Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.157-170. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Harris, A. (2016). The ethics of researching images found online. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, methodology, and Practice, pp.61-73. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Henderson, M., Johnson, N. F. & Auld, G. (2013). Silences of ethical practice: dilemmas for researchers using social media. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(6), pp.546–560. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Hinkson, M. (2017). At the edges of the visual culture of exile: a glimpse from South Australia. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.93-104. Hoffmann, A. L. & Jonas, A. (2017). Recasting justice for internet and online industry research ethics. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.3-18. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Hope, A. (2017). World of Spycraft: video games, gamification and surveillance creep. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.162-173. Hård af Segerstad, Y., Kasperowski, D., Kullenberg, C. & Howes, C. (2017). Studying closed communities on-line: digital methods and ethical considerations beyond informed consent and anonymity. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.213-225. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Jadue Roa, D. S. (2017). Ethical issues in listening to young children in visual participatory research. International journal of inclusive education, 21(3), pp.332-345. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Johansen, S. L. & Larsen, M. C. (2019). Børn, unge og medier. Samfundslitteratur. Johansen, S. L. & Larsen, M. C. (2020). Undersøgelser af børn, unge og medier. Samfundslitteratur. Kort og præcist om medier og kommunikation. Johnson, J. D. (2017). Ethics, Agency, and Power. In Hess, A. & Davisson, A. (Eds.) (2017). Theorizing Digital Rhetoric, pp.196-208. New York: Routledge. Kennedy, K. & Wilson, N. (2019). The banality of digital aggression. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.214-230. New York: Routledge.











185

Klastrup, L. (2017). Death, affect and the ethical challenges of outing a griefsquatter. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.235-242. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lagerkvist, A. (2018). The internet is always awake. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.189-209. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Lee, M. & Crofts, T. (2017). Sexting and young people: surveillance and childhood sexuality. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.81-92. Lenette, C. (2017). Using digital storytelling in participatory research with refugee women. London: SAGE. Light, B., Mitchell, P. & Wikström, P. (2018). Big data, method and the ethics of location: a case study of a hookup app for men who have sex with men. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D. & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical use of social media to facilitate qualitative research. Qualitative health research, 25(1), pp.99-109. Manderson, L., Davis, M., Colwell, C. & Ahlin, T. (2015). On secrecy, disclosure, the public, and the private in anthropology. Current anthropology, 56(S12), pp.183-190. Martinez-Martin, N., Insel, T. R., Dagum, P., Greely, H. T. & Cho, M. K. (2018). Data mining for health: staking out the ethical territory of digital phenotyping. Npj Digital Medicine, 1(1), Springer Nature. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Matthiesen, N. & Szulevicz, T. (2018). Mom, Dad, and the Research Object: The Ethics of Conducting Research Based on Your Own Children's Everyday Life. Anthropology and education quarterly, 49(3), pp.329-339. Miller, V. (2018). The ethics of digital being. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence - Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence in Digital Culture, pp.171-186. London: Routledge. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Monks, H., Cardoso, P., Papageorgiou, A., Carolan, C., Costello, L. & Thomas, L. (2015). Young people's views regarding participation in mental health and wellbeing research through social media. International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(1), pp.4-19. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Mudaly, N. (2015). The rights of pre-verbal children involved in video-recorded research. An examination of the ethical issues. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 23, pp.391-404.











186

Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R. & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). E-Research: Ethics, Security, Design, and Control in Psychological Research on the Internet. Journal of social issues, 58(1), pp.161–176. Accessed: 26-09-2018. Oboler, A., Welsh, K. & Cruz, L. (2012). The danger of big data: Social media as computational social science. First Monday, 17(7). Accessed: 26-09-2018. Oravec, J. A. (2012). The ethics of sexting: issues involving consent and the production of intimate content. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.129-145. New York: Peter Lang. Pilcher, K. (2016). Issues of collaboration, representation, meaning and emotions: utilising participant-led visual diaries to capture the everyday lives of people in mid to later life. International journal of social research methodology, 19(6), pp.677-692. Puurveen, G., Phinney, A., Cox, S. & Purves, B. (2016). Ethical considerations in the use of video observations in dementia end-of-life care research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.105-115. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Rogers, R. (2016). The harm of video games: the ethics behind regulating minors’ access to violent video games in light of the supreme court ruling. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.216-230. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Saunders, B., Kitzinger, J. & Kitzinger, C. (2015). Participant Anonymity in the Internet Age: From Theory to Practice. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), pp.125-137. Schaarschmidt, N. (2017). Media Ethics in Research on Video-Based Mental Health Care. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.137-142. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Schwartz, M. (2018). Thrownness, vulnerability, care. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.81-99. London: Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019. Servida, F. & Casey, E. (2019). IoT forensic challenges and opportunities for digital traces. Digital Investigation, 28. Elsevier BV. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Steeves, V. (2017). Terra cognita: surveillance of young people’s favourite websites. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.174-186. Stevens, G., O'Donnell, V. L. & Williams, L. (2015). Public domain or private data? Developing an ethical approach to social media research in an inter-disciplinary project. Educational research and evaluation, 21(2), pp.154-167.








187

Stroud, S. R. (2016). “Be a bully to beat a bully”: Twitter ethics, online identity, and the culture of quick revenge. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.264-278. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Sumiala, J. (2018). Digital rituals and the quest for existential security. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.210-226. London: Routledge. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Third, A., Livingstong, S. & Lansdown, G. (2019). Recognizing children’s rights in relation to digital technologies: challenges of voice and evidence, principle and practice. In Wagner, B., Kettemann, M. C. & Vieth, K. (Eds.) (2019). Research Handbook on Human Rights and Digital Technology, pp.376-410. Edward Elgar Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Tiidenberg, K. (2018). Research ethics, vulnerability, and trust on the internet. In Hunsinger, J., Klastrup, L. & Allen, M. (Eds.) (2018). Second international handbook of internet research, pp.1-15. Dordrecht. Springer. Torres, J. R. F. & Warr, D. (2016). Using visual research methods to explore first-person accounts of suicide behavior. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.141-155. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Turin, M. (2011). Born Archival: The Ebb and Flow of Digital Documents from the Field. History and Anthropology, 22(4), pp.445–460. Van Brakel, R. (2017). Rise of pre-emptive surveillance: unintended social and ethical consequences. In Taylor, E. & Rooney, T. (Eds.) (2017). Surveillance futures: social and ethical implications of new technologies for children and young people. New York: Routledge, pp.187-199. Watley, E. (2016). Race, gender, and digital media: the mis-adventures of awkward black girl and the representations of black female identity. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.248-263. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Waycott, J., Davis, H., Warr, D., Edmonds, F. & Taylor, G. (2017). Co-constructing Meaning and Negotiating Participation: Ethical Tensions when ‘Giving Voice’ through Digital Storytelling. Interact Computers, 29(2), pp.237-247. Whitty, M. (2004). Peering into online bedroom windows: considering the ethical implications of investigating internet relationships and sexuality. In Buchanan, E. A. (Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: Issues and controversies, pp.203-218. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Wildermuth, S. (2016). When privates are public: ethical issues in news media coverage of transgender people. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.202-215. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.





188

Wojak, R. (2012). The moral status of grieving. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.146-163. New York: Peter Lang. Wolfgang, J. D. (2016). Opening the marketplace: a case for the protection of anonymous online comments. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.85-103. New York: Peter Lang.


189

WEB ARCHIVES


190

29. Web archives The past few years have given us new means of storing information online, which can be beneficial in many ways. History can be preserved digitally, texts and literature is being increasingly uploaded to online databases and our data can be stored online, without taking up space in our offices. Authors such as Stine Lomborg (2018) asks, what the nature of our data is: leaving texts online, whether it is a Facebook post, a tweet on Twitter or an edited Wikipedia text, can be “a communicative trace or extension of the person” (Lomborg, 2018, p.101). According to Lomborg, this means that we should keep in mind that we are dealing with human beings and not simply texts. Another researcher in this field is Niels Brügger, who has researched what it means when national libraries create web archives in a world where the “web” is messy and unstructured, and often only maintained by individuals or organizations who may knowingly or unknowingly delete elements that we hoped would ‘always be there, online, for us to find’. This category provides you with examples of research made in the field of webarchives. Bakare, A. A. (2018). Digital Libraries and Copyright of Intellectual Property. Advances in Library and Information Science (pp.377-395), IGI Global. Accessed: 05-09-2019. Brügger, N. (2017). Web history and social media. In Flick, U. (Ed.) (2017).The sage handbook of social media, pp.196-212. London: Sage publications. Brügger, N. (2017). Webraries and Web Archives: The Web between public and private. In D. Baker, & W. Ewans (Eds.), The End of Wisdom?: The Future of Libraries in a Digital Age, pp.185–190. Oxford: Chandos Publishing. Burkholder, C. & MacEntee, K. (2016). Exploring the ethics of the participant-produced archive: the complexities of dissemination. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.211-224. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media. Carusi, A. & Jirotka, M. (2009). From data archive to ethical labyrinth. Qualitative research, 9(3), pp.285-298. Comstock, G. (2015). Using digital archives in historical research: What are the ethical concerns for a ‘forgotten’ individual? In Research Ethics, pp.108-119. Cambridge University Press. Diara, F. (2019). Cultural Heritage Digital Data: Future and Ethics. In Kremers, H. (2019). Digital Cultural Heritage. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Geraghty, R. (2017). Curation After the Fact: Practical and Ethical Challenges of Archiving Legacy Evaluation Data. International Journal of Digital Curation, 12(1) (pp.152-161), Edinburgh University Library. Accessed: 12-09-2019.






191

Hawkes, L. (2007). Impact of invasive web technologies on digital research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.337-351. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Laursen, D., Sandvik, K. & Brügger, N. (2017). Metoder til indsamling af internetmateriale og deres effekt på senere analyser med Facebook som eksempel. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.31-49. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. Light, B., Mitchell, P. & Wikström, P. (2018). Big data, method and the ethics of location: a case study of a hookup app for men who have sex with men. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Lips, M. (2019). Citizen identity, privacy, ethics and security. In Lips, M. (2019). Digital Government - Managing Public Sector Reform in the Digital Era, pp.197-221. London: Routledge.

Lomborg, S. (2013). Personal internet archives and ethics. Research Ethics, 9(1), pp.20-31. Lomborg, S. (2018). Ethical considerations for web archives and web history research. In Brügger, N. & Milligan, I. (Eds.) (2018). Sage Handbook of Web History, pp.a99-111. London: SAGE Publications. McGeeney, E. (2015). Live tweeting and building the digital archive; #NFQLR – who and what is it for? International journal of social research methodology, 18(3), pp.307-319. McIntire-Strasburg, J. (2007). Multimedia research: difficult questions with indefinite answers. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.287-300. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. Owens, T. (2017). Digital Sources & Digital Archives: The Evidentiary Basis of Digital History. Center for Open Science. Accessed: 16-09-2019. Ragas, J. (2019). Digital Resources: Digital Peru. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin American History. London: Oxford University Press. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Suomela, T., Chee, F., Berendt, B. & Rockwell, G. (2019). Applying an Ethics of Care to Internet Research: Gamergate and Digital Humanities. Digital Studies/Le champ numérique, 9(1), Open Library of the Humanities. Accessed: 03-09-2019. Tromble, R. & Stockmann, D. (2017). Lost umbrellas: bias and the right to be forgotten in social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.75-91. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018. Turin, M. (2011). Born Archival: The Ebb and Flow of Digital Documents from the Field. History and Anthropology, 22(4), pp.445–460.



https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/t5rdy/

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/t5rdy/

https://oxfordre.com/latinamericanhistory/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199366439.001.0001/acrefore-9780199366439-e-716






192