Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research Ethics, Vulnerability, and Trust on the Internet

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Second International Handbook of Internet Research

Abstract

This chapter addresses the impossible situations, decisions, and what-if imaginaries researchers are faced with daily, especially if undertaking qualitative and/or internet research and/or with vulnerable populations and/or on sensitive topics. It aligns with voices arguing that standardized procedural research ethics are inadequate, and builds on existing work in situational, practice based and feminist ethics to suggest a care based ethical practice. The key to this care based practice of research ethics lies in a particular kind of relationality. This relationality, in turn, is fed by trust and germinates empathy. The chapter works through the concepts and the phenomena of significant relations, trust, and empathy by drawing examples from my ethnographic research with a community of people, who post (semi)naked selfies of their bodies online (constituting a qualitative, internet research study of a sensitive topic, and thus arguably with a vulnerable population). I describe some of my choices and actions that seem to have worked well to build trusting, emphatic and ethical research relationships, and finish the chapter by offering some suggestions and questions that might help those trying to practice an ethics of care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 599.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For an overview of the historical and philosophical basis of feminist research ethics read Preissle (2007) and Preissle and Han (2012)

References

  • Allaste AA, Tiidenberg K (2015) Sexy selfies of the transitioning self. In: Woodman D, Bennett A (eds). Youth cultures, belonging and transitions: bridging the gap in youth research. London: Palgrave

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer RL (1976) Role of personality and the social situation. In: Chelune GJ (ed) Self disclosure: origins, patterns, and implications of openness in interpersonal relationships. Jossey Bass, San Francisco, pp 28–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Baym NK, Markham AN (2009) Introduction: making smart choices on shifting ground. In: Markham AN, Baym NK (eds) Internet inquiry: conversations about method. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp vii–xix

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaulieu A, Estalella A (2012) Rethinking research ethics for mediated settings. Inf Commun Soc 15:23–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • boyd d (2010) Social network sites as networked publics: affordances, dynamics, and implications. In: Papacharissi Z (ed) Networked self: identity, community, and culture on social network sites. Routledge, New York, pp 39–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Brass DJ, Butterfield KD, Skaggs BC (1998) Relationships and unethical behavior: a social network perspective. Acad Manag Rev 23(1):14–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Couldry N (2012) Media, society, world: social theory and digital media practice. Polity, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Decety J, Hodges SD (2006) A social cognitive neurosciencemodel of human empathy. In: van Lange PAM (ed) Bridging social psychology: benefits of transdisciplinary approaches. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 103–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncombe J, Jessop J (2002) Ethics in qualitative research “doing rapport” and the ethics of “faking friendship”. In: Melanie C, Birchjulie M, Miller J (eds) Ethics in qualitative research. SAGE, London, pp 108–121

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Egan J, Chenoweth L, McAuliffe D (2006) Email-facilitated qualitative interviews with traumatic brain injury survivors: a new accessible method. Brain Inj 20:1283–1294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis C (2007) Telling secrets, revealing lives: relational ethics in research with initimate others. Qual Inq 13:3–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eynon R, Fry J, Schroeder R (2008) The ethics of internet research. In: Fielding N, Lee RM, Blank G (eds) The handbook of online research methods. SAGE Publications, London, pp 23–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Felzmann H (2013) Ethical issues in internet research: international good practice and Irish research ethics documents. In: Fowley C, English C, Thouseny S (eds) Internet research, theory and practice: perspectives from Ireland. Research-publishing net, Dublin, pp 11–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick C (2016) Informed consent and the Facebook emotional manipulation study. Res Ethics 12:14–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher JF (1966) Situation ethics: the new morality. Westminster, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilson EC (2013) The ethics of vulnerability: a feminist analysis of social life and practice. Routledge, London/New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gobo G (2008) Doing ethnography. SAGE, Los Angeles

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon E (2003) Trials and tribulations of navigating IRBs: anthropological and biomedical perspectives of ‘risk’ in conducting human subjects research. Anthropol Q 76:299–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris A (2005) Discourses of desire as governmentality: young women, sexuality and the significance of safe spaces. Fem Psychol 15(1):39–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Held V (2006) The ethics of care: personal, political, global. Oxford University Press/Routledge, Oxford/New York and London

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson S, Gilding M (2004) “I’ve never clicked this much with anyone in my life”: trust and hyperpersonal communication in online friendships. New Media Soc 6:487–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hesse-Bieber S, Leavy P (2011) The practice of qualitative research. SAGE, Los Angeles/Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochschild AR (1983) The managed heart: the commercialization of human feeling. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen KB, Helles R (2011) The internet as a cultural forum: implications for research. New Media Soc 13(4):517–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John NA (2017) the age of sharing. Polity, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Kofoed J, Staunæs D (2015) Hesitancy as ethics. Reconcept Educ Res Methodol 6:24–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer A, Guillory JE, Hancock JT (2014) Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111:8788–8790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson D (2004) Blurring the boundaries: ethical considerations for online research using synchronous CMC forums. In: Buchanan EA (ed) Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies. Information Science Publishing, Hershey/London, pp 80–100

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lee RM (1993) Doing research on sensitive topics. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomborg S (2012) Personal internet archives and ethics. Res Ethics 9:20–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markham AN (2007) Method as ethic, ethic as method. J Inf Ethics 15:37–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markham AN (2015) Produsing ethics [for the digital near future]. In: Lind R (ed) Produsing theory in a digital world 2.0: the intersection of audiences and production in contemporary theory, vol 2. Peter Lang, New York, pp 247–256

    Google Scholar 

  • Markham A (2017) Impact model for ethics: notes from a talk. Retrieved from: https://annettemarkham.com/2017/07/impact-model-ethics/

  • Markham AN, Buchanan E (2012) Ethical decision-making and internet research, recommendations from the AoIR ethics working committee (version 2.0). Retreived from: http://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf

  • Markham AN, Buchanan E (2015) Ethical considerations in digital research contexts. In: Wright JD (ed) Encyclopedia for social & behavioral sciences. Elsevier Press, Oxford, pp 606–613

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marzano M (2012) Informed consent. In: Gubrium JF, Holstein JA, Marvasti AB, McKinney KB (eds) The SAGE handbook of interview research: the complexity of the craft. SAGE, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattingly C (2005) Toward a vulnerable ethics of research practice. Health 9(4):453–471. http://doi.org/10.1177/1363459305056413

  • Mauthner MS (2012) Accounting for our part of the entangled webs we weave: ethical and moral issues in digital data sharing. In: Miller T, Birch M, Mauthner M, Jessop J (eds) Ethics in qualitative research. SAGE, London, pp 157–176

    Google Scholar 

  • McCosker H, Barnard A, Gerber R (2001) Undertaking sensitive research: issues and strategies for meeting the safety needs of all participants. Forum Qual Soc Res 2:22

    Google Scholar 

  • McKee HA, Porter JE (2009) The ethics of internet research. A rhetorical, case-based process. Peter Lang, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Muise A (2011) Women’s sex blogs: Challenging dominant discourses of heterosexual desire. Fem Psychol 21(3):411–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noddings N (1984) Caring: a feminine approach to ethics & moral education. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Noddings N (2003) Caring: a feminine approach to ethics & moral education, 2nd edn. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissenbaum H (2004) Privacy as contextual integrity. Wash Law Rev 79:119–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissenbaum H (2010) Privacy in context: technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Pillow WS (2003) Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological power in qualitative research. Qual Stud Educ 16:175–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pittaway E, Bartolomei L, Hugman R (2010) “Stop stealing our stories”: the ethics of research with vulnerable groups. J Hum Rights Pract 2:229–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preissle J (2007) Feminist research ethics. In: Hesse-Biber SN (ed) Handbook of feminist research: theory and praxis. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Preissle J, Han Y (2012) Feminist research ethics. In: Hesse-Biber SN (ed) Handbook of feminist research: theory and praxis. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 583–605

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick B (2016) Researchers just released profile data on 70,000 OkCupid users without permission. Retrieved from: https://www.vox.com/2016/5/12/11666116/70000-okcupid-users-data-release

  • Shelley-Egan C (2015) Ethics assessment in different fields: Internet research ethics. Retrieved from: http://satoriproject.eu/media/2.d.2-Internet-research-ethics.pdf

  • Suler J (2004) The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychol Behav 7(3):321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swartz S (2011) “Going deep” and “giving back”: strategies for exceeding ethical expectations when researching amongst vulnerable youth. Qual Res 11(1):47–68. http://doi.org/10.1177/1468794110385885

  • Tiidenberg, K (2014a) There’s no limit to your love – scripting the polyamorous self. J Psychol 22(1):1–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiidenberg K (2014b) Bringing sexy back: reclaiming the body aesthetic via self shooting. Cyberpsychology 8(1)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiidenberg K (2015) Boundaries and conflict in a NSFW community on tumblr – the meanings an uses of selfies. New Media Soc 18:1563–1578

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiidenberg K (2017) “Nude selfies til I die” – making of sexy in selfies. In Nixon PG, Düsterhöft I (eds) Sex in the digital age. Routledge (accepted for publication)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiidenberg K (2018a) Selfies: why we love (and hate) them. Emerald Society Now Books

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tiidenberg K (2018b) Ethics in digital research. In Flick U (ed) Handbook of qualitative data collection. Sage (accepted for publication)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiidenberg K, Gomez Cruz E (2015) Selfies, image and the re-making of the body. Body Soc 21:77–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiidenberg K, Whelan A (2017) Sick bunnies and pocket dumps: ‘not-selfies’ and the genre of self-representation. Pop Commun. Special issue on Self- (Re)presentation Now

    Google Scholar 

  • Vetlesen AJ (1994) Perception, empathy, and judgment: an inquiry into the preconditions of moral performance. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Kosinski M (2018) Deep neural networks are more accurate than humans at detecting sexual orientation from facial images. J Pers Soc Psychol 114(2):246–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warrell JG, Jacobsen M (2014) Internet research ethics and the policy gap for ethical practice in online research settings. Can J High Educ Revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur 44:22–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmer M (2010) “But the data is already public”: on the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics Inf Technol 12:313–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aarhus University, School of Communication and Culture, Aarhus, Denmark

    Katrin Tiidenberg

  2. Baltic Film, Media, Arts and Communication School, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia

    Katrin Tiidenberg

Authors
  1. Katrin Tiidenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katrin Tiidenberg .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Communication Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    Jeremy Hunsinger

  2. Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia

    Matthew M. Allen

  3. IT University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Lisbeth Klastrup

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature B.V.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Tiidenberg, K. (2020). Research Ethics, Vulnerability, and Trust on the Internet. In: Hunsinger, J., Allen, M., Klastrup, L. (eds) Second International Handbook of Internet Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1555-1_55

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation