References
- al-Khateeb, H. M., Epiphaniou, G., Alhaboby, Z. A., Barnes, J., & Short, E. (2017). Cyberstalking: Investigating formal intervention and the role of corporate social responsibility. Telematics & Informatics, 34, 339–349. doi:1016/j.tele.2016.08.016 doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2016.08.016
- Bell, L. (2014). Ethics and feminist research. In S. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Feminist research practice: A primer (2nd ed., pp. 73–106). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, Communication & Society, 15, 662–679. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
- Brandtzæg, P. B., Lüders, M., & Skjetne, J. H. (2010). Too many Facebook ‘friends’? Content sharing and sociability versus the need for privacy in social network sites. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 26, 1006–1030. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2010.516719
- Buzzanell, P. (2006). Feminist discursive ethics. In G. Cheney, S. May, & D. Munshi (Eds.), The handbook of communication ethics (pp. 64–83). New York, NY: Routledge.
- Collins, P. H. (2000). Black feminist thought. New York: Routledge.
- Collins, P. H., & Bilge, S. (2016). Intersectionality. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
- Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299. doi: 10.2307/1229039
- Denzin, N. K. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- DeVault, M., & Gross, G. (2007). Feminist interviewing: Experience, talk, and knowledge. In S. N. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and praxis (pp. 173–198). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Dubrofsky, R. E., & Magnet, S. A. (Eds.). (2015). Feminist surveillance studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
- Gajjala, R. (2002). An interrupted postcolonial/feminist cyberethnography: Complicity and resistance in the ‘cyberfield’. Feminist Media Studies, 2(2), 177–193. doi:10.1080/1468077022015085 doi: 10.1080/14680770220150854
- Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and ‘ethically important moments’ in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 261–280. doi:10.1177/1077800403262360s doi: 10.1177/1077800403262360
- Harding, S. (2004). The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Hesse-Biber, S. N. (2014). Feminist research practice: A primer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Korn, J. U., & Kneese, T. (2015). Guest editors’ introduction: Feminist approaches to social media research: History, activism, and values. Feminist Media Studies, 15, 707–710. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2015.1053713
- Leurs, K. (2017). Feminist data studies: Using digital methods for ethical, reflexive and situated socio-cultural research. Feminist Review, 115, 130–154. doi: 10.1057/s41305-017-0043-1
- Libert, T. (2015). Health privacy online: Patients at risk. In S. P. Gangadharan, V. Eubanks, & S. Barocas (Eds.), Data and discrimination: Collected essays (pp. 16–20). Retrieved from https://www.newamerica.org/oti/policy-papers/data-and-discrimination/
- Markham, A., & Baym, N. (2009). Internet inquiry: Conversations about method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Markham, A., & Buchanan, E. (2012). Ethical decision-making and Internet research: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee. Retrieved from http://www.aoir.org
- Marwick, A., & Boyd, D. (2014). Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media & Society, 16, 1051–1067. doi: 10.1177/1461444814543995
- Metcalf, J., & Crawford, K. (2016). Where are human subjects in big data research? The emerging ethics divide. BigData & Society, 3(1), 1–14.
- Morrow, O., Hawkins, R., & Kern, L. (2015). Feminist research in online spaces. Gender, Place & Culture, 22, 526–543. doi: 10.1080/0966369X.2013.879108
- Nakamura, L. (2015). Blaming, shaming, and the feminization of social media. In R. Dubrofsky & S. Magnet (Eds.), Feminist surveillance studies (pp. 221–228). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
- Nissenbaum, H. (2010). Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
- Pillow, W. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological power in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 16, 175–196. doi: 10.1080/0951839032000060635
- Plumwood, V. (1993). Feminism and the mastery of nature. London: Routledge.
- Protection of Human Subjects. (2009). 45 C.F.R. § 46.
- Roberts, L. D. (2015). Ethical issues in conducting qualitative research in online communities. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12, 314–325. doi: 10.1080/14780887.2015.1008909
- The Royal Society. (2017). Machine learning: The power and promise of computers that learn by example. Retrieved from the Royal Society website: www.royalsociety.org/machinelearning
- Viseu, A., Clement, A., & Aspinal, J. (2004). (2004) Situating privacy online. Information, Communication & Society, 7(1), 92–114. doi: 10.1080/1369118042000208924
- Vitak, J., Shilton, K., & Ashktorab, Z. (2016). Beyond the Belmont principles: Ethical challenges, practices, and beliefs in the online data research community. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing (CSCW 2016) (pp. 941–953). San Francisco, CA: ACM.
- Walker, M. U. (2007). Moral understandings: A feminist study in ethics (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.