Online vs. offline research
It's interesting to consider how internet based research is different from more traditional, offline research. As noted in the article by Wright, some of the greatest worries about internet research is whether or not we can get a representative sample and whether it's possible to ensure the validity of participants. Although I get why there might be some increased concern with these issues for online studies, in most ways offline studies suffer from the same problems. For example, trying to get a representative sample of gay men to take a traditional paper-and-pencil survey isn't very possible since we really don't have a good estimate of the number of gay men in the US and how they're distributed. Offline studies also suffer validity problems, especially is participants aren't required to complete an interview face-to-face (e.g., completing a survey and sending it in). Whether participants are completing surveys online or offline, they can always lie or distort their answers. So, it seems like a lot of attention is being paid to the possible pitfalls of Internet research, but honestly traditional self-report survey methods seem just as problematic.
Both Laura and Turkle brought up the issue of protecting participant confidentiality regarding online postings. Although good practice to minimize any harm to participants when possible, I do think it's also important to be able to cite the actual source where possible since the source is the foundation upon which good scientific evidence is based. If we aren't certain of the veracity of the source, it's a little hard to establish scientific credibility.
Comments
I agree with Keith about the similiarity of certain issues pertaining to online and offline research. I do wonder, however, if we're doing enough to address issues of privacy and confidentiality in Internet research that taps into online postings, as in Cohn's 9/11 study. Granted, authors using livejournal.com (and other sources) are penning "public" entries, but is this a strong enough basis for us as researchers to ethically use? Cohn's study used entries of those who indicated permission for search engines to access their diaries. It's unclear for what purpose they have indicated permission - to read? To research? And what of groups that don't have this option? What about support groups? What's the standard practice for researchers? I haven't seen a study that indicates it requested the ability to "lurk" and gather information. In class we've spoken about naivete of users regarding the public aspect of the Internet. In instances of use for sensitive purposes (health-related support groups, for instance), what additional steps should we take to protect participants' rights? Is removing identifying markers really enough?
Posted by: bhudson | April 17, 2006 12:47 PM
I don't see that using publicly available information is an ethical dilemma. If it is published on the Internet using information in a manner that is consistent with fair use should be ethically acceptable. By posting on a publicly available space you give implicit permission for your writing to be accessed and disseminated by any and all audiences.
It seems to me that all medical/support group websites need to have a disclaimer that remind participants that they are publicly publishing information that can be accessed by others for many purposes including research would be an easy step to take to curtail part of the dilemma caused by lack of knowledge of the part of the user.
Posted by: Kimberly Schultz | April 17, 2006 2:29 PM
I think Brenda raises an excellent point about lurking and studies, although I think that would indicate a pretty broad view of "lurking." If you simply mean not posting, then yes, but lurking I think tends to have a negative connotation that implies an extraneous piece or third wheel within the community itself. I would think that a researcher would simply identify himself/herself as an outside party if need be, and then transcribe posts and use pseudonymns. Isn't that legal? It doesn't seem that that would violate privacy rights, since posts, even in a support forum, are public, no?
Posted by: Matthew Kaplan | April 17, 2006 2:58 PM