Ethical Issues in Conducting Qualitative Research in Online Communities

References

• Author & colleagues 2008
   Google Scholar
• Barratt, MJ 2012, ‘The efficacy of interviewing young drug users through online chat’, Drug & Alcohol Review, vol. 31, pp. 566–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battles, HT 2010, ‘Exploring ethical and methodological issues in Internet-based research with adolescents’, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, vol. 9, pp. 27–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaulieu, A & Estalella, A 2012, ‘Rethinking research ethics for mediated settings’, Information, Communication & Society, vol. 15, pp. 23–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond, CS, Ahmed, OH, Hind, M, Thomas, B & Hewitt-Taylor, J 2013, ‘The conceptual and practical ethical dilemmas of using health discussion board posts as research data’, Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. e112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley, SK & Carter, B 2012, ‘Reflections on the ethics of Internet newsgroup research’, International Journal of Nursing Studies, vol. 49, pp. 625–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brownlow, C & O’Dell, L 2002, ‘Ethical issues for qualitative research in on-line communities’, Disability & Society, vol. 17, pp. 685–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bromseth, JCH 2002, ‘Public places: public activities? Methodological approaches and ethical dilemmas in research on computer-mediated communication contexts’, in A Morrison (ed.), Researching ICTs in context, University of Oslo, Oslo, pp. 31–61.
   Google Scholar
• Brotsky, SR, & Giles, D 2007, ‘Inside the “Pro-ana” community: a covert online participant observation’, Eating Disorders: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention, vol. 15, pp. 93–109.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Calvey, D 2008, ‘The art and politics of covert research: doing “situated ethics” in the field’, Sociology, vol. 42, pp. 905–18.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, M, Bolding, G, Hart, G, Sherr, L & Elford, J 2004, ‘Reflecting on the experience of interviewing online: perspective from the Internet and HIV study’, AIDS Care, vol. 16, pp. 944–52.
   Google Scholar
• Eysenbach, G & Till, JE 2001, ‘Ethical issues in qualitative research on Internet communities’, British Medical Journal, vol. 323, pp. 1103–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleischmann, A & Miller, EC 2013, ‘Online narratives by adults with ADHD who were diagnosed in adulthood’, Learning Disability Quarterly, vol. 36, pp. 47–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, J, Dixit, J & Green, D 2002 ‘Studying hate crime with the internet: what makes racists advocate racist violence?’, Journal of Social Issues, vol. 58, pp. 177–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guillemin, M & Gillam, L 2004, ‘Ethics, reflexivity and ethically important moments in research’, Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 10, pp. 261–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haigh, C & Jones, NA 2005, ‘An overview of the ethics of cyber-space research and the implications for nurse educators’, Nurse Education Today, vol. 25, pp. 3–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair, N & Clark, M 2007, ‘The ethical dilemmas and challenges of ethnographic research in electronic communities’, International Journal of Market Research, vol. 49, pp. 781–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heilferty, CM 2011, ‘Ethical considerations in the study of online illness narratives: a qualitative review’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 67, pp. 945–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, EM, Law, EF, Palermo, TM & Eccleston, C 2012, ‘Case study: ethical guidance for pediatric e-health research using examples from pain research with adolescents’, Journal of Pediatric Psychology, vol. 37, pp. 1116–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewitt-Taylor, J & Bond, CS 2012, ‘What e-patients want from the doctor-patient relationship: content analysis of posts on discussion boards’, Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 146, pp. e155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holtz, P, Kronberger, N & Wagner, W 2012, ‘Analysing internet forums: a practical guide’, Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods and Applications, vol. 242, pp. 55–66.
   Google Scholar
• Hudson, JM & Bruckman, A 2004, ‘“Go away”: participant objections to being studied and the ethics of chatroom research’, The Information Society, vol. 20, pp. 127–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, S 1996, ‘Researching internet communities: proposed ethical guidelines for the reporting of the results’, The Information Society, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 119–27.
   Google Scholar
• Kraut, R, Olson, J, Banaji, M, Bruckman, A, Cohen, J & Couper, M 2004, ‘Psychological research online: report of Board of Scientific Affairs Advisory Group on the conduct of research on the Internet’, American Psychologist, vol. 59, 105–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lomborg, S 2013, Personal internet archives and ethics, Research Ethics, vol. 9, pp. 20–31.
   Google Scholar
• Malik, SH & Coulson, NS 2013, ‘Coming to terms with permanent involuntary childlessness: a phenomenological analysis of bulletin board postings’, Europe’s Journal of Psychology, vol. 91.
   Google Scholar
• Marcus, MA, Westra, HA, Eastwood, JD, Barnes, KL & Mobilizing Minds Research Group 2012, ‘What are young adults saying about mental health? An analysis of Internet blogs’, Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 141, pp. e17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markham, AN 2005, ‘The methods, politics, and ethics of representation in online ethnography’, in N Denzin & Y Lincoln (eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 793–820.
   Google Scholar
• Markham, AN 2012, ‘Fabrication as ethical practice: qualitative inquiry in ambiguous Internet contexts’, Information, Communication & Society, vol. 15, pp. 334–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markham, AN & Buchanan, E, with contributions from the AoIR ethics working committee 2012, Ethical decision-making and Internet research 2.0: recommendations from the AoIR ethics working committee, viewed 15 March 2015, http://www.aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Moreno, MA, Grant, A, Kacvinsky, L, Moreno, P & Fleming, M 2012, ‘Older adolescents’ views regarding participation in Facebook research’, Journal of Adolescent Health, vol. 51, pp. 439–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien, MR & Clark, D 2012, ‘Unsolicited written narratives as a methodological genre in terminal illness: changes and limitations’, Qualitative Health Research, vol. 22, pp. 274–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paechter, C 2013, ‘Researching sensitive issues online: implications of a hybrid insider/outsider position in a retrospective ethnographic study’, Qualitative Research, vol. 31, pp. 71–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rier, DA 2007, ‘Internet social support groups as moral agents: the ethical dynamics of HIV+ status disclosure’, Sociology of Health & Illness, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 1043–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, LD 2001, Social interaction in virtual environments, PhD Dissertation, Curtin University, Australia. Retrieved 15 March 2015 from http://espace.library.curtin.edu.au:80/R?func=dbin-jump-full&local_base=gen01-era02&object_id=12792
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, LD, Smith, LM & Pollock, CM 2008, ‘Ethical issues in conducting online research’, in M Khosrow-Pour (ed.), Encyclopedia of information science and technology (2nd ed). Information Science Reference, Hershey, PA, pp. 1443–1449.
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, J 2013, ‘Narrating dementia: self and community in an online forum’, Qualitative Health Research, vol. 23, pp. 1215–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, R 1994, ‘Science and ethics in conducting, analysing and reporting psychological research’, Psychological Science, vol. 5, pp. 127–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schotanus-Dijkstra, M, Havinga, P, van Ballegooijen, W, Delfosse, L, Mokkenstorm, J & Boon, B 2014, ‘What do the bereaved by suicide communicate in online support groups?: a content analysis’, Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention, vol. 35, pp. 27–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seale, C, Charteris-Black, J, MacFarlane, A & McPherson, A 2010, ‘Interviews and internet forums: a comparison of two sources of qualitative data’, Qualitative Health Research, vol. 20, pp. 595–606.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharkey, S, Jones, R, Smithson, J, Hewis, E, Emmens, T, Ford, T & Owens, C 2011, ‘Ethical practice in internet research involving vulnerable people: lessons from a self-harm discussion forum study SharpTalk’, Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 37, pp. 752–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skitka, LJ & Sargis, EG 2006, ‘The Internet as psychological laboratory’, Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 57, pp. 529–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The British Psychological Society 2007, ‘Report of the working party on conducting research on the Internet. Guidelines for ethical practice in psychological research online’, viewed 15 March 2015, http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/media/global/wwwadminoxacuk/localsites/curec/documents/internetresearch.pdf
   Google Scholar
• The National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council and the Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee, 2007 ( updated December 2013), National statement on ethical conduct in human research, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
   Google Scholar
• Whiteman, N 2012, ‘Ethical stances in (Internet) research’, in N Whiteman (ed.), Undoing ethics, Springer, New York, pp. 1–23.
   Google Scholar