Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences
Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Anabo, Icy Fresno [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2018 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© The Author(s) 2018 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Ethics and information technology - Springer Netherlands, 1999, 21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:21 ; year:2018 ; number:2 ; day:28 ; month:12 ; pages:137-149 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
OLC207273293X |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC207273293X | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230503053531.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 200819s2018 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC207273293X | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-He213)s10676-018-9495-z-p | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 100 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 19,2 |a 24,1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 084 | |a 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft |2 bkl | ||
| 084 | |a 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Anabo, Icy Fresno |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-7204-3064 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2018 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © The Author(s) 2018 | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Internet research ethics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Online research ethics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Digital research ethics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Ethics guidelines for internet research | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Belmont Report | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar |0 (orcid)0000-0003-3138-7650 |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes |0 (orcid)0000-0001-7011-2444 |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Ethics and information technology |d Springer Netherlands, 1999 |g 21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149 |w (DE-627)252052609 |w (DE-600)1454583-4 |w (DE-576)094107777 |x 1388-1957 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:21 |g year:2018 |g number:2 |g day:28 |g month:12 |g pages:137-149 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-TGE | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-MAT | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-BUB | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OPC-BBI | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft |q VZ |0 106418807 |0 (DE-625)106418807 |
| 936 | b | k | |a 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines |q VZ |0 106402811 |0 (DE-625)106402811 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 21 |j 2018 |e 2 |b 28 |c 12 |h 137-149 | ||
| author_variant |
i f a if ifa i e a iea l v g lvg |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:13881957:2018----::eiiighbloteotehclrnilsnnenteitdeerhesetvsrmicpia |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2018 |
| bklnumber |
54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines |
| publishDate |
2018 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z doi (DE-627)OLC207273293X (DE-He213)s10676-018-9495-z-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 19,2 24,1 ssgn 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines bkl Anabo, Icy Fresno verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-7204-3064 aut Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences 2018 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2018 Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research. Internet research ethics Online research ethics Digital research ethics Ethics guidelines for internet research Belmont Report Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar (orcid)0000-0003-3138-7650 aut Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes (orcid)0000-0001-7011-2444 aut Enthalten in Ethics and information technology Springer Netherlands, 1999 21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149 (DE-627)252052609 (DE-600)1454583-4 (DE-576)094107777 1388-1957 nnns volume:21 year:2018 number:2 day:28 month:12 pages:137-149 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TGE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-BUB SSG-OPC-BBI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_2014 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft VZ 106418807 (DE-625)106418807 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines VZ 106402811 (DE-625)106402811 AR 21 2018 2 28 12 137-149 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z doi (DE-627)OLC207273293X (DE-He213)s10676-018-9495-z-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 19,2 24,1 ssgn 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines bkl Anabo, Icy Fresno verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-7204-3064 aut Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences 2018 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2018 Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research. Internet research ethics Online research ethics Digital research ethics Ethics guidelines for internet research Belmont Report Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar (orcid)0000-0003-3138-7650 aut Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes (orcid)0000-0001-7011-2444 aut Enthalten in Ethics and information technology Springer Netherlands, 1999 21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149 (DE-627)252052609 (DE-600)1454583-4 (DE-576)094107777 1388-1957 nnns volume:21 year:2018 number:2 day:28 month:12 pages:137-149 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TGE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-BUB SSG-OPC-BBI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_2014 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft VZ 106418807 (DE-625)106418807 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines VZ 106402811 (DE-625)106402811 AR 21 2018 2 28 12 137-149 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z doi (DE-627)OLC207273293X (DE-He213)s10676-018-9495-z-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 19,2 24,1 ssgn 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines bkl Anabo, Icy Fresno verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-7204-3064 aut Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences 2018 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2018 Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research. Internet research ethics Online research ethics Digital research ethics Ethics guidelines for internet research Belmont Report Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar (orcid)0000-0003-3138-7650 aut Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes (orcid)0000-0001-7011-2444 aut Enthalten in Ethics and information technology Springer Netherlands, 1999 21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149 (DE-627)252052609 (DE-600)1454583-4 (DE-576)094107777 1388-1957 nnns volume:21 year:2018 number:2 day:28 month:12 pages:137-149 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TGE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-BUB SSG-OPC-BBI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_2014 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft VZ 106418807 (DE-625)106418807 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines VZ 106402811 (DE-625)106402811 AR 21 2018 2 28 12 137-149 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z doi (DE-627)OLC207273293X (DE-He213)s10676-018-9495-z-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 19,2 24,1 ssgn 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines bkl Anabo, Icy Fresno verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-7204-3064 aut Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences 2018 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2018 Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research. Internet research ethics Online research ethics Digital research ethics Ethics guidelines for internet research Belmont Report Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar (orcid)0000-0003-3138-7650 aut Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes (orcid)0000-0001-7011-2444 aut Enthalten in Ethics and information technology Springer Netherlands, 1999 21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149 (DE-627)252052609 (DE-600)1454583-4 (DE-576)094107777 1388-1957 nnns volume:21 year:2018 number:2 day:28 month:12 pages:137-149 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TGE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-BUB SSG-OPC-BBI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_2014 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft VZ 106418807 (DE-625)106418807 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines VZ 106402811 (DE-625)106402811 AR 21 2018 2 28 12 137-149 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z doi (DE-627)OLC207273293X (DE-He213)s10676-018-9495-z-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 19,2 24,1 ssgn 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines bkl Anabo, Icy Fresno verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-7204-3064 aut Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences 2018 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2018 Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research. Internet research ethics Online research ethics Digital research ethics Ethics guidelines for internet research Belmont Report Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar (orcid)0000-0003-3138-7650 aut Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes (orcid)0000-0001-7011-2444 aut Enthalten in Ethics and information technology Springer Netherlands, 1999 21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149 (DE-627)252052609 (DE-600)1454583-4 (DE-576)094107777 1388-1957 nnns volume:21 year:2018 number:2 day:28 month:12 pages:137-149 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TGE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-BUB SSG-OPC-BBI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_2014 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft VZ 106418807 (DE-625)106418807 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines VZ 106402811 (DE-625)106402811 AR 21 2018 2 28 12 137-149 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Ethics and information technology 21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149 volume:21 year:2018 number:2 day:28 month:12 pages:137-149 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Ethics and information technology 21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149 volume:21 year:2018 number:2 day:28 month:12 pages:137-149 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Internet research ethics Online research ethics Digital research ethics Ethics guidelines for internet research Belmont Report |
| dewey-raw |
100 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Ethics and information technology |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Anabo, Icy Fresno @@aut@@ Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar @@aut@@ Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2018-12-28T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
252052609 |
| dewey-sort |
3100 |
| id |
OLC207273293X |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC207273293X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230503053531.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2018 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC207273293X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s10676-018-9495-z-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">100</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">19,2</subfield><subfield code="a">24,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Anabo, Icy Fresno</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-7204-3064</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Internet research ethics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Online research ethics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Digital research ethics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ethics guidelines for internet research</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Belmont Report</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-3138-7650</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-7011-2444</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Ethics and information technology</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Netherlands, 1999</subfield><subfield code="g">21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)252052609</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1454583-4</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)094107777</subfield><subfield code="x">1388-1957</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:21</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2018</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">day:28</subfield><subfield code="g">month:12</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:137-149</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TGE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-MAT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-BUB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-BBI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield><subfield code="0">106418807</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)106418807</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield><subfield code="0">106402811</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)106402811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">21</subfield><subfield code="j">2018</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="b">28</subfield><subfield code="c">12</subfield><subfield code="h">137-149</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Anabo, Icy Fresno |
| spellingShingle |
Anabo, Icy Fresno ddc 100 ssgn 19,2 bkl 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines misc Internet research ethics misc Online research ethics misc Digital research ethics misc Ethics guidelines for internet research misc Belmont Report Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences |
| authorStr |
Anabo, Icy Fresno |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)252052609 |
| format |
Article |
| dewey-ones |
100 - Philosophy & psychology |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut |
| collection |
OLC |
| remote_str |
false |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1388-1957 |
| topic_title |
100 VZ 19,2 24,1 ssgn 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines bkl Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences Internet research ethics Online research ethics Digital research ethics Ethics guidelines for internet research Belmont Report |
| topic |
ddc 100 ssgn 19,2 bkl 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines misc Internet research ethics misc Online research ethics misc Digital research ethics misc Ethics guidelines for internet research misc Belmont Report |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 100 ssgn 19,2 bkl 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines misc Internet research ethics misc Online research ethics misc Digital research ethics misc Ethics guidelines for internet research misc Belmont Report |
| topic_browse |
ddc 100 ssgn 19,2 bkl 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines misc Internet research ethics misc Online research ethics misc Digital research ethics misc Ethics guidelines for internet research misc Belmont Report |
| format_facet |
Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
nc |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Ethics and information technology |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
252052609 |
| dewey-tens |
100 - Philosophy |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Ethics and information technology |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)252052609 (DE-600)1454583-4 (DE-576)094107777 |
| title |
Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)OLC207273293X (DE-He213)s10676-018-9495-z-p |
| title_full |
Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences |
| author_sort |
Anabo, Icy Fresno |
| journal |
Ethics and information technology |
| journalStr |
Ethics and information technology |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
100 - Philosophy & psychology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2018 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
137 |
| author_browse |
Anabo, Icy Fresno Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes |
| container_volume |
21 |
| class |
100 VZ 19,2 24,1 ssgn 54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft bkl 06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines bkl |
| format_se |
Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Anabo, Icy Fresno |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z |
| normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0002-7204-3064 (ORCID)0000-0003-3138-7650 (ORCID)0000-0001-7011-2444 106418807 106402811 |
| normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0002-7204-3064 (orcid)0000-0003-3138-7650 (orcid)0000-0001-7011-2444 106418807 (DE-625)106418807 106402811 (DE-625)106402811 |
| dewey-full |
100 |
| title_sort |
revisiting the belmont report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences |
| title_auth |
Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences |
| abstract |
Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research. © The Author(s) 2018 |
| abstractGer |
Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research. © The Author(s) 2018 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research. © The Author(s) 2018 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TGE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-BUB SSG-OPC-BBI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_2014 |
| container_issue |
2 |
| title_short |
Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z |
| remote_bool |
false |
| author2 |
Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes |
| author2Str |
Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes |
| ppnlink |
252052609 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
n |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T16:00:20.983Z |
| _version_ |
1803574230108864512 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC207273293X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230503053531.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2018 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC207273293X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s10676-018-9495-z-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">100</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">19,2</subfield><subfield code="a">24,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Anabo, Icy Fresno</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-7204-3064</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Revisiting the Belmont Report’s ethical principles in internet-mediated research: perspectives from disciplinary associations in the social sciences</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract The purpose of this article is to illuminate the conceptualisations and applications of the Belmont Report’s key ethical principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice based on a document analysis of five of the most relevant disciplinary guidelines on internet research in the social sciences. These seminal documents are meant to provide discipline-specific guidance for research design and implementation and are regarded as key references when conducting research online. Our analysis revealed that the principles of respect and beneficence were explicitly conveyed in the documents analysed, offering nuanced interpretations on issues of informed consent, privacy, and benefits and risks as well as providing recommendations for modifying traditional practices to fit the online setting. However, the invocations of the principle of justice were rather implicit and reflect an important shift from the Belmont Report’s protectionist ethical position towards more situational and dialogic approaches. With the rapidly evolving nature of internet technologies, this analysis is projected to contribute to the ongoing developments in research ethics in the social sciences by outlining the tensions and implications of the use of the internet as a methodological tool. We also seek to provide recommendations on how disciplinary associations can proceed to facilitate ethically sensitive internet research.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Internet research ethics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Online research ethics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Digital research ethics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ethics guidelines for internet research</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Belmont Report</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Elexpuru-Albizuri, Iciar</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-3138-7650</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Villardón-Gallego, Lourdes</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-7011-2444</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Ethics and information technology</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Netherlands, 1999</subfield><subfield code="g">21(2018), 2 vom: 28. Dez., Seite 137-149</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)252052609</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1454583-4</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)094107777</subfield><subfield code="x">1388-1957</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:21</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2018</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">day:28</subfield><subfield code="g">month:12</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:137-149</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9495-z</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TGE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-MAT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-BUB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-BBI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.08$jInformatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield><subfield code="0">106418807</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)106418807</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">06.30$jBibliothekswesen$jDokumentationswesen: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield><subfield code="0">106402811</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)106402811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">21</subfield><subfield code="j">2018</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="b">28</subfield><subfield code="c">12</subfield><subfield code="h">137-149</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.400695 |