ethical research in the information age

ITForum Paper #8

Ethical Research in the Information Age:

Beginning the Dialogue

Lynne Schrum

The University of Georgia

"For them, it has become a public library, a mailbox, an intellectual bazaar and coffee klatch all rolled into a single electronic address." (McInnes, 1994, p. A1)

A newspaper recently used that description in discussing individuals forwhom the use of electronic networks has become part of the socialinfrastructure of their community. It is now possible to communicatewith people all over the world for social, professional, and educationalreasons, and new notions of what constitutes a community are encouraginga change in commonly used research tools. Researchers who studycommunities or explore on-line communications are adapting theiractivities to reflect the current change in communications.

The impetus for this article came from a discussion at a qualitativeconference during this researcher's session about electronicethnographic research (Schrum, 1995). A lively interchange occurred, inwhich individuals expressed widely differing views. Several members ofthe audience felt that anything posted electronically was fair game forthe researcher's lens and that gaining informed permission was notnecessary, especially on comments posted to a listserv. Others felt justas strongly that online research required extra attention to ethicalbehavior.

As the number of researchers looking at the nature of electroniccommunications grows, it will become even more essential that ourresearch community engage in a dialogue regarding the transfer ofethical standards to this new medium. This paper touches on thepossibilities of on-line research and reflects on the traditions ofethical qualitative research within the context of electroniccommunications. It then offers suggestions for appropriate ways in whichto conduct such research.

Qualitative methods "are a source of well-grounded, rich descriptionsand explanations of processes occurring in local contexts" (Miles &Huberman, 1984, p. 15). Some consider the most important researchinstrument to be the researcher, and that a naturalistic setting ispreferable to any other (Erlandson, Harris, Skipper, & Allen, 1993).These unique features of naturalistic research, the time spent withrespondents, changes the nature of what we do. Noddings (1986) describesthe ways in which qualitative researchers build trusting relationshipswith our respondents, and the nature of our desire to see these peopleas individuals, rather than as subject.

How then does one study these new electronic (virtual) communities,given that the researcher cannot easily share a meal? How does one find

Page 1

ethical research in the information agean ethical way into local context? One might describe these new ways ofstudy as an amalgam, taking an ethnographic perspective, usinginterviews and participant observations, and intertwining this withelectronic communications. Terms have evolved to describe the actions ofthese new researchers, such as electronic ethnographer, electronicparticipant observer, or tele-researcher. Regardless of the name, thetask is similar, evolving, and not without difficulties.

What must a researcher do in order to be able to gather information fromongoing or archived listservs, electronic mail or informal electronicdiscussions? Can we expect that the same rules apply to this researchthat apply to research conducted face to face? What is the nature of ourresponsibilities? Researchers must address the question, "What kind ofresearch activity in cyberspace would constitute a clear violation ofprofessional ethics?" (Jones, 1994, p. 30).

Every qualitative researcher must create a delicate dialogical balancebetween "protection of the subjects versus freedoms to conduct researchand to publish research findings" (Punch, 1994, p. 88). Stories aboundof those who crossed the line between ethical and unethical activities,with the latter being those in which subjects were not even informedabout their inclusion in the projects. Janesick maintains that the verynature of qualitative research, which brings the researcher in constantand personal contact with the participants, presents a "recurringethical dilemma" (1994, p. 209).

The issues are discussed in detail in my more extensive article, andinclude asking what responsibilities and decisions does an ethicalqualitative researcher, or perhaps any ethical researcher, have to takein order to ensure electronic research maintains the highest possiblestandards? Several recommendations have emerged from this researcher'sexperiences as an electronic participant observer and from gatheringresources for this article. First, questions that could begin a debateinclude:

* Who owns archived material on listservs?

* What responsibilities do researchers have in using electronic communications as the "field" of their study?

* What rights do individuals have with respect to their electronic communications to others via e-mail? to lists? to papers they have allowed to be posted electronically?

The list of guidelines at the end of this article will serve as astarting point toward the establishment of ethical guidelines.

Second, all members of the academic community, especially those engagedin research using or about electronic communications, need to understandthe scope of constitutional communication rights. We "should provide theleadership in developing and adopting policies that maximize the freedomto express ideas and arguments" (Smith, 1994, p. 96). For if researchersdo not take the lead, and develop ethical guidelines for themselves,others may decide to do it.

Third, it is incumbent on those who have embraced electroniccommunications, for collaboration, research, and interaction, to commit"to more serious participation in the process of dialogue andnegotiation with other players in the national policy discussion"(Lyman, 1995, p 35). As decisions are being made, those with experiencewith both academic research and electronic communications must step intothe debate. Branscomb, a communications lawyer, said that the conflictsthat arise are, "indicative of the confusion surrounding legal concepts

Page 2

ethical research in the information agethat have survived the test of time in the non-computer world but maynot stand up to scrutiny in the electronic context" (1991, p. 157).

Electronic communication has changed the fundamental nature of theteaching, learning, and researching process for many of us in academe.Although the field changes almost daily, it is not too early to begin adialogue that will support our efforts and establish our credibilitywell into the future.

Ethical Electronic Research Guidelines

These guidelines begin with an understanding that researchers seek to beethical, honest, and inclusive. I refer readers to a variety ofdiscussions on this topic which incorporate naturalistic inquiry,evaluation, critical theorists, and feminist perspectives (Erickson,1986; Erlandson, Harris, Skipper, & Allen, 1993; Guba & Lincoln, 1989;Kincheloe & McLaren, 1994; Lather, 1991; Reinharz, 1992).

* Researchers must begin with an understanding of the basic tenets for conducting ethical qualitative research.

* Researchers should consider the respondents and participants as owners of the materials that are created; the respondents should have the ability to modify or correct statements for spelling, substance, or language.

* Researchers need to describe in detail the goals of the research, purposes to which the results will be put, plans of the researcher to protect participants, and recourse open to those who feel mistreated.

* Researchers should strive to create a climate of trust, collaboration, and equality with the electronic community members, within an environment that is non-evaluative and safe.

* Researchers should negotiate their entry into an electronic community, beginning with the owner of the discussion, if one exists. After gaining that entry, they should make their presence known in any electronic community, (for example, a listserv, specialized discussion group, or electronic class format), as frequently as necessary to inform to all participants of their presence and engagement in electronic research.

* Researchers should treat electronic mail as private correspondence that is not to be forwarded, shared, or used as research data unless express permission is given.

* Researchers have an obligation to begin by informing participants as much as possible about the purposes, activities, benefits, and burdens that may result from their being studied.

* Researchers must inform participants as to any risks that might result from their agreeing to be part of the study--especially psychological or social risks.

* Researchers must respect the identity of the members of the community, with special efforts to mask the origins of the communication, unless express permission to use identifying information is given.

* Researchers must be aware of the steep learning curve for electronic communications. Information about the research should

Page 3

ethical research in the information age be placed a variety of accessible formats.

* Researchers have an obligation to the electronic community in which they work and participate to communicate back results of their work.

References

Branscomb, A. W. (1991). Common law for the electronic frontier.*/Scientific American/*, *265*(3), 112-116.

Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M.C. Wittrock (Eds.), */Handbook of research on teaching/* (pp. 119-161).New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D. (1993).*/Doing naturalistic inquiry./* Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). */Fourth generation evaluation./*Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Janesick, V. J. (1994). The dance of qualitative research design:Metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln(Eds.), */Handbook of qualitative research/* (pp. 209-219). NewburyPark, CA: Sage, Publications.

Jones, R. A. (1994). The ethics of research in cyberspace. */InternetResearch/*, *4*(3), 30-35.

Kincheloe, J. L. & McLaren, P. L. (1994). Rethinking critical theory andqualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), */Handbookof qualitative research/* (pp. 138-157). Newbury Park, CA: Sage,Publications.

Lather, P. (1991). */Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogywith/in the postmodern./* New York: Routledge.

Lyman, P. (1995). Copyright and fair use. */Educom Review/*, *30*(1), 33-35.

McInnes, C. (1994, December 28). Like library, free-net brings data tothe masses. */Globe and Mail/*, A1, A6.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). */Qualitative data analysis./*Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.

Noddings, N. (1986). Fidelity in teaching, teacher education, andresearch for teaching. */Harvard Educational Review/*, *56*(4), 496-510.

Punch, M. (1994). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In N. K.Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), */Handbook of Qualitative Research/* (pp.83-97). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Reinharz, S. (1992). */>Feminist methods in social research./* New York:Oxford University Press.

Schrum, L. (1995, ). */Qualitative research in the information age:Electronic ethnographic tools./* Paper presented at the QualitativeResearch in Education Conference, Athens, GA.

Smith, S. (1994). Communication and the constitution in cyberspace.*/Communication Education/*, *43*(April), 87-101.

Page 4

ethical research in the information age

*** [This short article is derived from a more comprehensive discussion, "Framing the Debate: Ethical Research in the Information Age," which will be published in the Fall, 1995 issue of the */journal, Qualitative Inquiry/*, *1*(3), 311-326]

Lynne Schrum 607 Aderhold Department of Instructional Technology University of Georgia Athens, GA 30602

Phone: (706) 542-4159 Fax: (706) 542-4032 E-mail: lschrum@coe.uga.edu

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The buttons that appear below will be found at the bottom of each pageof the discussion. The first button will take you back to the previouspage (in this case, to the beginning of paper #8). The middle buttonwill take you to the ITForum home page. The last button takes youforward into the discussion as it progressed on-line.

<paper8.html> <http://itech1.coe.uga.edu/itforum/home.html> <disc8.html>

Page 5