March 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  


Search





About
This Blog
The author
     My Webpage
     My Faculty Profile
     My Curriculum Vitae (CV)
     Contact me


Archives
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003


Categories


Links to my published articles online
List of Publications with Full Citations

2006
Adolescent Diary Weblogs and the Unseen Audience

2005
Conversations in the Blogosphere: An Analysis "from the Bottom Up". Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-38) Best Paper Nominee.

Weblogs as a bridging genre

2004
Bridging the Gap: A Genre Analysis of Weblogs. Winner of the 2004 EduBlog Awards as best paper.

Common Visual Design Elements of Weblogs

Women and Children Last: The Discursive Construction of Weblogs

Time until my next publication submission deadline
27 March 2006 23:59:59 UTC-0500


Links to my conference papers online
2005
The Performativity of Naming: Adolescent Weblog Names as Metaphor

2004
Buxom Girls and Boys in Baseball Hats: Adolescent Avatars in Graphical Chat Spaces

Time until my next conference submission deadline
31 March 2006 23:59:59 UTC-0500


Bibliographies
Adolescents and Teens Online Bibiliography
Last updated July 8, 2005.

Weblog and Blog Bibliography
Last Updated November 22, 2005.

My CiteULike Page

My Book2
New books are added but reading status is rarely accurate.


June 18, 2004

Understanding Internet Research Ethics Workshop Opening Keynote Discussion

The kickoff banquet for Understanding Internet Research Ethics Workshop was held earlier this evening. The keynote speaker was Elizabeth Buchanan, assistant professor and co-director of the Center for Information Policy Research at the School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee her talk was titled "Internet Research Ethics: An Introduction." It was a fairly small audience so there was lots of discussion. Much of the discussion centered on contextualizing ethics within the internet spaces we use as research locales. In particular there are two primary points I want to expand on a bit here.

The issue of anonymizing participants was raised. Initially the discussion was a binary choice either to make participants anonymous to protect their identities or we don't. I have long thought that this binary choice over simplifies the question and moves the lens in to micro-focus on our participants only. What is often forgotten is that anonymizing means that in pseudonymous environments researchers may be anonymizing the participant by changing their pseudonym to that of another participant who is unknown to us either in this or another similar environment. In essence we are protecting our participant by potentially indicting a person outside our study.

Two entangled issues surround the concept of public vs. private spaces were discussed at length. Researchers often present this discussion on a graph showing the two terms on a continuum while discussing the theories as though they too are binary concepts. The binary discussion privileges the participant's perception that their communication is private or public. This deontological discussion is valid but should not be the only questions asked in making the decision to treat the space in either manner; more needs to go into the discussion. Specifically do the "owners/operators" of the space as public or private? What access restrictions are present? Among other questions that must be considered by the researcher.

To give this theoretical discussion of cyberspace a down-to-earth example, let's say we have a privately owned park space. A gang utilizes the park as their space and feels a form of ownership for it. The gang treats the park space as private and limits access by other to the space. Who owns the park? Obviously the answer to the question is nuanced by the physical ownership, psychological ownership, and authorship of the discussions held within the park space.

Posted by prolurkr at June 18, 2004 02:25 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.professional-lurker.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/110