1
|
Finn M, Shilton K. Ethics governance development: The case of the Menlo Report. SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE 2023; 53:315-340. [PMID: 36802925 DOI: 10.1177/03063127231151708] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Abstract
The 2012 Menlo Report was an effort in which a group of computer scientists, US government funders, and lawyers produced ethics guidelines for research in information and communications technology (ICT). Here we study Menlo as a case of what we call ethics governance in the making, finding that this process examines past controversies and enrols existing networks to connect the everyday practice of ethics with ethics as a form of governance. To create the Menlo Report, authors and funders relied on bricolage work with existing, available resources, which significantly shaped both the report's contents and impacts. Report authors were motivated by both forward- and backward-looking goals: enabling new data-sharing as well as addressing past controversies and their implications for the field's body of research. Authors also grappled with uncertainty about which ethical frameworks were appropriate and made the decision to classify much network data as human subjects data. Finally, the Menlo Report authors attempted to enrol multiple existing networks in governance through appeals to local research communities as well as taking steps towards federal rulemaking. The Menlo Report serves as a case study in how to study ethics governance in the making: with attention to resources, adaptation, and bricolage, and with a focus on both the uncertainties the process tries to repair, as well as the new uncertainties the process uncovers, which will become the site of future ethics work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan Finn
- University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Prunkl CEA, Ashurst C, Anderljung M, Webb H, Leike J, Dafoe A. Institutionalizing ethics in AI through broader impact requirements. NAT MACH INTELL 2021. [DOI: 10.1038/s42256-021-00298-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
|
3
|
Favaretto M, De Clercq E, Gaab J, Elger BS. First do no harm: An exploration of researchers' ethics of conduct in Big Data behavioral studies. PLoS One 2020; 15:e0241865. [PMID: 33152039 PMCID: PMC7644008 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241865] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2020] [Accepted: 10/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Research ethics has traditionally been guided by well-established documents such as the Belmont Report and the Declaration of Helsinki. At the same time, the introduction of Big Data methods, that is having a great impact in behavioral research, is raising complex ethical issues that make protection of research participants an increasingly difficult challenge. By conducting 39 semi-structured interviews with academic scholars in both Switzerland and United States, our research aims at exploring the code of ethics and research practices of academic scholars involved in Big Data studies in the fields of psychology and sociology to understand if the principles set by the Belmont Report are still considered relevant in Big Data research. Our study shows how scholars generally find traditional principles to be a suitable guide to perform ethical data research but, at the same time, they recognized and elaborated on the challenges embedded in their practical application. In addition, due to the growing introduction of new actors in scholarly research, such as data holders and owners, it was also questioned whether responsibility to protect research participants should fall solely on investigators. In order to appropriately address ethics issues in Big Data research projects, education in ethics, exchange and dialogue between research teams and scholars from different disciplines should be enhanced. In addition, models of consultancy and shared responsibility between investigators, data owners and review boards should be implemented in order to ensure better protection of research participants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Eva De Clercq
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Jens Gaab
- Division of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Favaretto M, De Clercq E, Briel M, Elger BS. Working Through Ethics Review of Big Data Research Projects: An Investigation into the Experiences of Swiss and American Researchers. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2020; 15:339-354. [PMID: 32552544 DOI: 10.1177/1556264620935223] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
The employment of Big Data as an increasingly used research method has introduced novel challenges to ethical research practices and to ethics committees (ECs) globally. The aim of this study is to explore the experiences of scholars with ECs in the ethical evaluation of Big Data projects. Thirty-five interviews were performed with Swiss and American researchers involved in Big Data research in psychology and sociology. The interviews were analyzed using thematic coding. Our respondents reported lack of support from ECs, absence of appropriate expertise among members of the boards, and lack of harmonized evaluation criteria between committees. To implement ECs practices we argue for updating the expertise of board members and the institution of a consultancy model between researchers and ECs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Eva De Clercq
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Matthias Briel
- Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Chiauzzi E, Wicks P. Digital Trespass: Ethical and Terms-of-Use Violations by Researchers Accessing Data From an Online Patient Community. J Med Internet Res 2019; 21:e11985. [PMID: 30789346 PMCID: PMC6403524 DOI: 10.2196/11985] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2018] [Revised: 11/16/2018] [Accepted: 02/03/2019] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
With the expansion and popularity of research on websites such as Facebook and Twitter, there has been increasing concern about investigator conduct and social media ethics. The availability of large data sets has attracted researchers who are not traditionally associated with health data and its associated ethical considerations, such as computer and data scientists. Reliance on oversight by ethics review boards is inadequate and, due to the public availability of social media data, there is often confusion between public and private spaces. In addition, social media participants and researchers may pay little attention to traditional terms of use. In this paper, we review four cases involving ethical and terms-of-use violations by researchers seeking to conduct social media studies in an online patient research network. These violations involved unauthorized scraping of social media data, entry of false information, misrepresentation of researcher identities of participants on forums, lack of ethical approval and informed consent, use of member quotations, and presentation of findings at conferences and in journals without verifying accurate potential biases and limitations of the data. The correction of these ethical lapses often involves much effort in detecting and responding to violators, addressing these lapses with members of an online community, and correcting inaccuracies in the literature (including retraction of publications and conference presentations). Despite these corrective actions, we do not regard these episodes solely as violations. Instead, they represent broader ethical issues that may arise from potential sources of confusion, misinformation, inadequacies in applying traditional informed consent procedures to social media research, and differences in ethics training and scientific methodology across research disciplines. Social media research stakeholders need to assure participants that their studies will not compromise anonymity or lead to harmful outcomes while preserving the societal value of their health-related studies. Based on our experience and published recommendations by social media researchers, we offer potential directions for future prevention-oriented measures that can be applied by data producers, computer/data scientists, institutional review boards, research ethics committees, and publishers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Paul Wicks
- PatientsLikeMe, Inc, Cambridge, MA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Resnik DB, Finn PR. Ethics and Phishing Experiments. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS 2018; 24:1241-1252. [PMID: 28812222 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-017-9952-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2017] [Accepted: 07/27/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
Phishing is a fraudulent form of email that solicits personal or financial information from the recipient, such as a password, username, or social security or bank account number. The scammer may use the illicitly obtained information to steal the victim's money or identity or sell the information to another party. The direct costs of phishing on consumers are exceptionally high and have risen substantially over the past 12 years. Phishing experiments that simulate real world conditions can provide cybersecurity experts with valuable knowledge they can use to develop effective countermeasures and prevent people from being duped by phishing emails. Although these experiments contravene widely accepted informed consent requirements and involve deception, we argue that they can be conducted ethically if risks are minimized, confidentiality and privacy are protected, potential participants have an opportunity to opt out of the research before it begins, and human subjects are debriefed after their participation ends.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David B Resnik
- National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), 111 Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709, USA.
| | - Peter R Finn
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University at Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Desai T, Dhingra V, Shariff A, Shariff A, Lerma E, Singla P, Kachare S, Syed Z, Minhas D, Madanick R, Fang X. Quantifying the Twitter Influence of Third Party Commercial Entities versus Healthcare Providers in Thirteen Medical Conferences from 2011 - 2013. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0162376. [PMID: 27668433 PMCID: PMC5036883 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2015] [Accepted: 08/22/2016] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Twitter channels are increasingly popular at medical conferences. Many groups, including healthcare providers and third party entities (e.g., pharmaceutical or medical device companies) use these channels to communicate with one another. These channels are unregulated and can allow third party commercial entities to exert an equal or greater amount of Twitter influence than healthcare providers. Third parties can use this influence to promote their products or services instead of sharing unbiased, evidence-based information. In this investigation we quantified the Twitter influence that third party commercial entities had in 13 major medical conferences. Methods We analyzed tweets contained in the official Twitter hashtags of thirteen medical conferences from 2011 to 2013. We placed tweet authors into one of four categories based on their account profile: healthcare provider, third party commercial entity, none of the above and unknown. We measured Twitter activity by the number of tweet authors per category and the tweet-to-author ratio by category. We measured Twitter influence by the PageRank of tweet authors by category. Results We analyzed 51159 tweets authored by 8778 Twitter account holders in 13 conferences that were sponsored by 5 medical societies. A quarter of all authors identified themselves as healthcare providers, while only 18% could be identified as third party commercial entities. Healthcare providers had a greater tweet-to-author ratio than their third party commercial entity counterparts (8.98 versus 6.93 tweets). Despite having less authors and composing less tweets, third party commercial entities had a statistically similar PageRank as healthcare providers (0.761 versus 0.797). Conclusion The Twitter influence of third party commercial entities (PageRank) is similar to that of healthcare providers. This finding is interesting because the number of tweets and third party commercial entity authors required to achieve this PageRank is far fewer than that needed by healthcare providers. Without safety mechanisms in place, the Twitter channels of medical conferences can devolve into a venue for the spread of biased information rather than evidence-based medical knowledge that is expected at live conferences. Continuing to measure the Twitter influence that third parties exert can help conference organizers develop reasonable guidelines for Twitter channel activity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tejas Desai
- Division of Nephrology, W.G. (Bill) VA Medical Center, Salisbury, North Carolina, United States of America
- NOD Analytics, Charlotte, North Carolina, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| | - Vibhu Dhingra
- Department of Internal Medicine, East Carolina University – Brody School of Medicine, Greenville, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Afreen Shariff
- Division of Endocrinology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Aabid Shariff
- Monsanto Company, Raleigh, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Edgar Lerma
- Division of Nephrology, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America
| | - Parteek Singla
- Department of Internal Medicine, Barnes Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America
| | - Swapnil Kachare
- Department of Surgery, East Carolina University – Brody School of Medicine, Greenville, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Zoheb Syed
- College of Arts and Sciences, College of William and Mary, Yorktown, Virginia, United States of America
| | - Deeba Minhas
- Division of Rheumatology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, United States of America
| | - Ryan Madanick
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Xiangming Fang
- Department of Biostatistics, East Carolina University – Brody School of Medicine, Greenville, North Carolina, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Massimino B. Accessing Online Data: Web-Crawling and Information-Scraping Techniques to Automate the Assembly of Research Data. JOURNAL OF BUSINESS LOGISTICS 2016. [DOI: 10.1111/jbl.12120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
|
9
|
Teitcher JEF, Bockting WO, Bauermeister JA, Hoefer CJ, Miner MH, Klitzman RL. Detecting, preventing, and responding to "fraudsters" in internet research: ethics and tradeoffs. THE JOURNAL OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS : A JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS 2015; 43:116-33. [PMID: 25846043 PMCID: PMC4669957 DOI: 10.1111/jlme.12200] [Citation(s) in RCA: 198] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/12/2023]
Abstract
Internet-based health research is increasing, and often offers financial incentives but fraudulent behavior by participants can result. Specifically, eligible or ineligible individuals may enter the study multiple times and receive undeserved financial compensation. We review past experiences and approaches to this problem and propose several new strategies. Researchers can detect and prevent Internet research fraud in four broad ways: (1) through the questionnaire/instrument (e.g., including certain questions in survey; and software for administering survey); (2) through participants' non-questionnaire data and seeking external validation (e.g., checking data for same email addresses, usernames, passwords, and/or fake addresses or phone numbers; (3) through computer information, (e.g., IP addresses and cookies), and 4) through study design (e.g., avoid lump sum compensation and interviewing participants). These approaches each have pros and cons, and raise ethical, legal, and logistical questions, given that ethical tensions can emerge between preserving the integrity of research vs. protecting the privacy and confidentiality of study respondents. While past discussions concerning the ethics of online research have tended to focus on the participants' ability to trust the researchers, needs now arise to examine researchers' abilities to trust the participants. This analysis has several critical implications for future practice, policy, and research.
Collapse
|