Ethical issues in social media research for public health

American Journal of Public Health

Volumn 108, Issue 3, 2018, Pages 343-348

  Hunter, Ruth F ^a   Gough, Aisling ^a   O’Kane, Niamh ^a   McKeown, Gary ^a   Fitzpatrick, Aine ^a   Walker, Tom ^a   McKinley, Michelle ^a   Lee, Mandy ^b   Kee, Frank ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^b TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER SECURITY; CONFIDENTIALITY; CONSENSUS; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIVACY; PUBLIC HEALTH; SAMPLING; SCIENTIST; SOCIAL MEDIA; ETHICS; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES;

CONFIDENTIALITY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; PRIVACY; PUBLIC HEALTH; RESEARCH DESIGN; SOCIAL MEDIA;

EID: 85042018546     PISSN: 00900036     EISSN: 15410048     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2017.304249     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Qualman E. Socialnomics: How Social Media Transforms the Way We Live and Do Business. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley; 2012.
2. Perrin A. Social networking usage: 2005-2015. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/2015/ Social-Networking-Usage-2005-2015. Accessed April 18, 2017.
3. Eysenbach G. Infodemiology and infoveillance: framework for an emerging set of public health informatics methods to analyze search, communication and publication behavior on the Internet. J Med Internet Res. 2009;11(1):e11.
4. Denecke K, Bamidis P, Bond C, et al. Ethical issues of social media usage in healthcare. Yearb Med Inform. 2015;10(1): 137-147.
5. Vaidya YZJ, Clifton C. Privacy Preserving Data Mining. New York, NY: Springer; 2006.
6. Collmann J, Matei SA, eds. Ethical Reasoning in Big Data: an Exploratory Analysis. New York, NY: Springer; 2016.
7. Nissenbaum H. Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press; 2009.
8. Knijnenburg BP, Kobsa A, Jin H. Dimensionality of information disclosure behaviour. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2013; 71(12):1144-1162.
9. Obar JA, Oeldorf-Hirsch A. The biggest lie on the Internet: ignoring the privacy policies and terms of service policies of social networking services. Paper presented at: TPRC 44: The 44th Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy; September 30-October 1, 2016; Arlington, VA.
10. Montgomery KC. Youth and surveillance in the Facebook era: policy interventions and social implications. Telecomm Policy. 2015;39(9):771-786.
11. Zimmer M. “But the data is already public”: on the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics Inf Technol. 2010;12(4): 313-325.
12. Kosinski M, Stillwell D, Graepel T. Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110(15): 5802-5805.
13. Narayanan A, Shmatikov V. De-anonymizing social networks. Paper presented at: 30th IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, May 17-20, 2009; Oakland, CA.
14. Boyd DM, Ellison NB. Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. J Comput Mediat Commun. 2007;13(1): 210-230.
15. Grajales FJ III, Sheps S, Ho K, Novak-Lauscher H, Eysenbach G. Social media: a review and tutorial of applications in medicine and health care. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(2):e13.
16. Murthy D, Powell AB, Tinati R, et al. Automation, algorithms, and politics bots and political influence: a sociotechnical investigation of social network capital. Int J Commun. 2016;10:4952-4971.
17. Davis CA, Varol O, Ferrara E, Flammini A, Menczer F. BotOrNot: a system to evaluate social bots. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web. 2016; 273-274.
18. Luger E, Rodden T. Terms of agreement: rethinking consent for pervasive computing. Interact Comput. 2013; 25(3):229-241.
19. Kramer AD, Guillory JE, Hancock JT. Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks [published correction appears in Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111(29): 10779]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014; 111(24):8788-8790.
20. Kim NS. Wrap Contracts: Foundations and Ramifications. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2013.
21. Luger E, Rodden T. An informed view on consent for UbiComp. In: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. 2013; 529-538.
22. Gomer R, Schraefel MC, Gerding E. Consenting agents: semi-autonomous interactions for ubiquitous consent. In: UbiComp’14 Adjunct: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct Publication. 2014; 653-658.
23. Moran S, Luger E, Rodden T. An emerging tool kit for attaining informed consent in UbiComp. In: UbiComp’14 Adjunct: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct Publication. 2014; 635-639.
24. Hutton L, Henderson T. “I didn’t sign up for this!”: Informed consent in social network research. In: Proceedings of the 9th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM). 2015; 178-187.
25. Grady C, Cummings SR, Rowbotham MC, McConnell MV, Ashley EA, Kang G. Informed consent. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376(9):856-867.
26. Gelinas L, Pierce R, Winkler S, et al. Using social media as a research recruitment tool: ethical issues and recommendations. Am J Bioeth. 2017;17(3): 3-14.
27. Draucker CB, Martsolf DS, Poole C. Developing distress protocols for research on sensitive topics. Arch Psychiatr Nurs. 2009;23(5):343-350.
28. Elovici Y, Fire M, Herzberg A, Shulman H. Ethical considerations when employing fake identities in online social networks for research. Sci Eng Ethics. 2014; 20(4):1027-1043.
29. Samuel G. “The Danger of Lurking”: Different Conceptualizations of “User Awareness” in Social Media Research. Am J Bioeth. 2017;17(3):25-26.
30. Markham A, Buchanan E. Ethical decision-making and Internet research: recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee (version 2.0). Available at: https://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf. Accessed April 26, 2017.
31. Boyd D, Levy K, Marwick A. The networked nature of algorithmic discrimination. In: SP Gangadharan, ed., with V Eubanks, S Barocas. Data and Discrimination: Collected Essays. Washington, DC: Open Technology Institute-New America; 2014; 54-57.
32. Bull SS, Breslin LT, Wright EE, Black SR, Levine D, Santelli JS. Case study: an ethics case study of HIV prevention research on Facebook: the Just/ Us Study. J Pediatr Psychol. 2011;36(10): 1082-1092.
33. Moorhead SA, Hazlett DE, Harrison L, Carroll JK, Irwin A, Hoving C. A new dimension of health care: systematic review of the uses, benefits, and limitations of social media for health communication. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(4):e85.
34. Alshaikh F, Ramzan F, Rawaf S, Majeed A. Social network sites as a mode to collect health data: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(7):e171.
35. Velasco E, Agheneza T, Denecke K, Kirchner G, Eckmanns T. Social media and Internet-based data in global systems for public health surveillance: a systematic review. Milbank Q. 2014;92(1):7-33.
36. Hu Y. Health communication research in the digital age: a systematic review. J Commun Healthc. 2015;8(4): 260-288.
37. Townsend L, Wallace C. Social media research: a guide to ethics. Available at: http://www.dotrural.ac.uk/socialmediaresearchethics.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2017.
38. British Psychological Society. Ethics guidelines for Internet-mediated research. Available at: https://beta.bps.org.uk/sites/beta.bps.org.uk/files/Policy%20-% 20Files/Ethics%20Guidelines%20for% 20Internet-mediated%20Research%20% 282017%29.pdf. Accessed April 26, 2017.
39. Torous J, Nebeker C. Navigating ethics in the digital age: introducing Connected and Open Research Ethics (CORE), a tool for researchers and institutional review boards. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(2):e38.