ETHICAL CHALLENGES IN DIGITAL RESEARCH

(1)

Ethical challenges in digital research 2^nd edition

A guide to discuss ethical issues in digital research

Second edition

ETHICAL

CHALLENGES IN DIGITAL

RESEARCH

(2)

Ethical challenges in digital research

– A guide to discuss ethical issues in digital research Second edition

January 2020 Developed by

DIGETIK at Aalborg University as part of DIGHUMLAB Authors

Line Lisberg Christensen, Research Assistant Malene Charlotte Larsen, Associate Professor Layout

Steffen Madsen, DIGHUMLAB

(3)

I. Introduction to document

The ever-changing development of digital technologies and digital infrastructure makes it necessary for us as researchers to change approaches to digital research within the humanities. In terms of research ethics, we can no longer use traditional laws and guidelines that only match the non-digital world. In a time where it is necessary to change and re-think our ways of doing research, we bring to you this second version of Ethical Challenges in Digital Research to initiate discussions about ethical research and to help guide you in your digital research. The compound may serve you as a guideline to ethical research, a helpful tool to those in need of inspiration or merely as a list of literature that is relevant to your field, whether that is: big data, surveillance, privacy, games and gamification, ethics in studies with children and adolescents, health research, journalism, ethnographic studies, visual methods, vulnerable groups, web archives, economy, risky business for researchers or one of the many other categories in this collection of ethical digital research.

We initially created this document with the intention of helping scholars reflect and discuss the ethical dimensions of their digital research, whilst providing guidance and insight about how to deal with these issues. We have compiled a list of articles, papers, books, book chapters, guidelines and journals, which we believe can aid researchers and students alike.

In this second version, we have added more than 100 new literature results that have been spread across the categories. In addition, we have developed new categories that we believe are reflections of relevant and current fields in the academic world: Economy, Games/Gamification and Criminal/forensic case studies.

We have attempted to remain respectful and vigilant of the intention of each piece of literature, and great effort has been made to understand the intention and direction of the individual researchers. We gladly accept additional literature and proposals and we hope that our extensive work will provide you with ideas, insight and guidance to discuss ethical issues in digital research. Since developing this document, we have also decided to create a search-engine for your convenience. This you can find on DIGHUMLAB’s website, under the tab Learning Resources, or by clicking here.

(4)

II. Relevant academic journals and scholars

We have also chosen to provide the readers of this document with a list of journals of relevance when searching for literature within the field of digital ethics. We especially wish to emphasize the newest addition to the Association of Internet Researcher (AoIR) website, namely their Ethical Guidelines 3.0, which you can access here.

 Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR).

 Ethics and Information Technology.

 First Monday.

 Research Ethics Review.

 Information Ethics.

 Information, Communication & Ethics in Society.

 International Journal of Internet Research Ethics.

In addition, we believe that the following authors can be considered central researchers within the field of digital ethics:

 Amanda Lagerkvist

 Anja Bechmann

 Annette Markham

 Charles Ess

 Christian Fuchs

 Elaine Doyle

 Elizabeth A. Buchanan

 Helen Nissenbaum

 Joseph Migga Kizza

 Katharina E. Kinder-Kurlanda

 Katrin Weller

 Michael Zimmer

 Pål Aarsand

 Stine Lomborg

Naturally, other journals may also be relevant, whilst other researchers and authors are relevant as well. These lists only represent a small number of interesting and inspiring authors, researchers and journals.

(5)

Content

1. What is “digital ethics”? ...2

2. Big data ...7

3. Case studies ... 13

4. Challenges ... 32

5. Criminal/forensic case studies ... 51

6. Consent ... 54

7. Economy ... 64

8. Educational studies ... 66

9. Ethics in Journalism ... 69

10. Ethics in politics and legislation ... 74

11. Ethics in relation to businesses and companies ... 77

12. Ethics in relation to children and adolescents ... 80

13. Ethics in social relations ... 88

14. Ethnographic studies ... 99

15. Fabrication ... 106

16. Games/Gamification ... 109

17. Guidelines ... 112

18. Health research ... 122

19. Mixed, nice stuff ... 125

20. Original, innovative and changing of methods ... 131

21. Participatory methods ... 140

22. Privacy ... 147

23. Risky business for researchers... 158

24. Software and algorithms ... 162

25. Surveillance ... 166

26. Third-party tracking ... 170

27. Visual methods ... 172

28. Vulnerable groups ... 182

29. Web archives ... 190

(6)

WHAT IS

“DIGITAL

ETHICS”?

(7)

1. What is “digital ethics”?

Digital ethics has become a field of its own. When dealing with digital data we often find ourselves dealing with ethics from a distance: our connection with participants/subjects is often none-existent, because the participants are on the other side of the computer. To act

“ethically” will become inherently more challenging, because we need to rethink how to treat our participants when they are no longer in front of us. In the development of this second version of Ethical Challenges in Digital Research, we have revisited the category and added even more relevant literature in which digital ethics is practiced or researched.

While literature from authors such as Charles Ess (2014), Annette Markham (2015) and Christian Fuchs (2017) still reside in the category, we also welcome Eoghan Casey (2018) and Jeffrey T. Hancock (2019) to the category “What is Digital Ethics?”

Alderson P. (2004). Ethics. In Fraser, A., Lewis, V., Ding, S., Kellett, M. & Robinson, C. (Eds.) (2004). Doing Research with Children and Young People, pp.97–111. London: Sage Publications.

Allen, C. (1996). What’s Wrong with the “Golden Rule”? Conundrums of Conducting Ethical Research in Cyberspace. The Information Society 12 (2), pp.175-188.

Association of Internet Research (2012). Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research.

Accessed: 06-09-2018.

Boehlefeld, S. P. (2011). Doing the Right Thing: Ethical Cyberspace Research. The Information Society 12(2), pp.141-152.

Buchanan, E.A. & Zimmer, M. (2013). Internet research ethics. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.) (2013).

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed: 30-10-2018.

Casey, E., Geradts, Z. & Nikkel, B. (2018). Transdisciplinary strategies for digital investigation challenges. Digital Investigation, 25 (pp.1-4), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 04-09- 2019.

Chari, T. (2017). Ethical pitfalls in the digital age: when the desire to “serve hot” gets in the way of verification. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.25-43. Information Science Reference (ISR).

Clark, K., Duckham, M., Guillemin, M., Hunter, A., McVernon, J., O’Keefe, C., Pitkin, C., Prawer, S., Sinnott, R., Warr, D. & Waycott, J. (2018). Advancing the ethical use of digital data in human research: challenges and strategies to promote ethical practice. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(1) (pp.59-73), Springer Science and Business Media LLC.

Accessed: 03-09-2019.

Doyle, E. (2017). Embracing qualitative research: a visual model for nuanced research ethics oversight. Qualitative research, 17(1), pp.95-117. Accessed: 28-09-2018.

(8)

Dreyfus, H. (2001). On the Internet. New York: Routledge.

Ess, C. (2014). Central issues in the ethics of Digital Media. In Ess, C. (2014). Digital media ethics (2), pp.1-34. Malden, Massachusetts: Polity.

Franzke, A. S., Bechmann, A., Zimmer, M., Ess, C. & the Association of Internet Researchers (2020). Internet Research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0. Accessed: 02-12-2019.

Fuchs, C. (2017). From digital positivism and administrative big data analytics towards critical digital and social media research! European journal of communication, 32(1), pp.37-49. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice. New York:

Peter Lang.

Hancock, J. T. (2019). The Ethics of Digital Research. In Welles, B. F. & González-Bailón, S.

(Eds.) (2019). The Oxford Handbook of Networked Communication. London: Oxford University Press. Accessed: 03-09-2019.

Hongladarom, S. (2017). Internet research ethics in a non-western context. In Zimmer, M.

& Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.151-163. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10- 2018.

Hoser, B. & Nitschke, T. (2010). Questions on ethics for research in the virtually connected world. Social Networks, 32, pp.180–186.

Jasanoff, S. (2016). The ethics of invention: technology and the human future. New York:

W. W. Norton & Company.

Johnson, D. G. (2001). Computer Ethics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kizza, J. M. (2007). Computer Crimes. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.239-262. London: Springer.

Kizza, J. M. (2007). Introduction to social and ethical computing. In Kizza, J. M. (2007).

Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.1-18. London: Springer.

Kizza, J. M. (2007). Morality and the law. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.19-36. London: Springer.

Kizza, J. M. (2007). New frontiers for computer ethics artificial intelligence, cyberspace, and virtual intelligence. In Kizza, J. M. (2007). Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age, pp.263-281. London: Springer.

Lipschultz, J. H. (2015). Social media communication: concepts, practices, data, law and ethics. Routledge.

(9)

Mann, C. & Stewart, F. (2000). Internet communication and qualitative research – a handbook for researching online. SAGE publications.

Markham, A. N. (2006). Ethic as Method, Method as Ethic: A Case for Reflexivity in Qualitative ICT Research. Information ethics.

Markham, A. (2015). Produsing Ethics [for the digital near future]. In Lind, R. (Ed.) (2015).

Produsing Theory in a Digital World 2.0: The Intersection of Audiences and Production in Contemporary Theory (2), pp.247-366. Digital Formations, (99). Peter Lang.

Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2015). Internet research: ethical concerns. In Wright, J.

(Ed.) (2015). International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (2), pp.606- 613. Elsevier Science.

Miko-Schefzig, K. & Reiter, C. (2018). Participatory Organization Research in the Context of the Police: Ethical Research with Vulnerable Groups Using the Example of Detention Centers. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018.

McKee, H. A. & Porter, J. E. (2009). The ethics of Internet research: a rhetorical, case-based process. New York: Peter Lang.

Pentzold, C. (2017). 'What are these researchers doing in my wikipedia?': Ethical premises and practical judgment in internet-based ethnography. Ethics and Information Technology, 19(2), pp.143-155.

Shilton, K. & Sayles, S. (2016). "We Aren't All Going to Be on the Same Page about Ethics":

Ethical Practices and Challenges in Research on Digital and Social Media. 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 2016-March, pp.1909-1918.

Accessed: 28-6-2018.

Tiidenberg, K. (2017). Ethics in Digital Research. In Flick, U. (Ed.) (2017). SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection. SAGE Publications.

Tiidenberg, K. (2018). Research ethics, vulnerability, and trust on the internet. In Hunsinger, J., Klastrup, L. & Allen, M. (Eds.) (2018). Second international handbook of internet research, pp.1-15. Dordrecht. Springer.

Van den Hoonaard, W. C. (2018). Autobiographical notes from inside the ethics regime:

some thoughts on how researchers in the social sciences can own ethics. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018.

Whiteman, N. (2012). Undoing ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York:

Springer.

Yanow, D. & Schwart-Shea, P. (2018). Framing "Deception" and "Covertness" in Research:

Do Milgram, Humphreys, and Zimbardo Justify Regulating Social Science Research Ethics?

Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 04-10-2018.

(10)

Zook, M., S. Barocas, D., Boyd, K. Crawford, E. Keller, S. P. Gangadharan, A. Goodman, et al.

(2017). Ten simple rules for responsible big data research. PLoS Computational Biology 13 (3). Accessed: 28-09-2018.

(11)

BIG DATA

(12)

2. Big data

The stream of data available online indeed qualifies as “BIG”: social media alone can provide us with countless amounts of both qualitative and quantitative data of movement, likes, shares, comments, posts and much more. Authors such as Michael Zimmer (2018), Annette Markham (2017), Dirk Helbing (2018), Christian Fuchs (2017), Katrin Weller (2015) and many other researchers have researched what it means to collect and process Big Data from online platforms and digital technologies.

Bancroft, A., Karels, M., Murray, Ó. M. & Zimpfer, J. (2014). Not being there: research at a distance with video, text and speech. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?:

qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.137-154. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.

Barocas, S. & Nissenbaum, H. (2014). Big data's end run around procedural privacy protections. Communications of the ACM, 57(11), pp.31-33.

Bechmann, A. & Vahlstrup, P.B. (2015). Studying Facebook and Instagram data: The digital footprints software. First Monday, 20(12), 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Boyd, D. & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data information.

Communication & society, 15(5), pp.662-679. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Brooker, P., Barnett, J. Cribbin, T. & Sharma, S. (2016). Have we even solved the first ‘big data challenge’? Practical issues concerning data collection and visual representation for social media analytics. In Snee, V., Hine, C., Morey, Y., Roberts, S. & Watson, H. (Eds.) (2016). Digital Methods for Social Science: an Interdisciplinary Guide to Research Innovation, pp.34-50. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Buchanan, E.A. & Zimmer, M. (2013). Internet research ethics. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.) (2013).

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed: 30-10-2018.

Burkell, J. A. (2016). Remembering me: Big data, individual identity, and the psychological necessity of forgetting. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(1). Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Clarke, R. & Taylor, K. (2018). Towards responsible data analytics: a process approach. 31^st BLED econference: digital transformation: meeting the challenges, june 17-20, 2018, Bled, Slovenia, conference proceedings. Pucihar, A., Kljajić Borštnar. M., Ravesteijn, P., Seitz, J. & Bons, R.

Collmann, J. & Matei, S. A. (Eds.) (2016). Ethical Reasoning in Big Data - An Exploratory Analysis. Springer.

Condie, J., Lean, G. & Wilcockson, B. (2017). The Trouble with Tinder: The Ethical Complexities of Researching Location-Aware Social Discovery Apps. In Woodfield, K.

(Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.135-158.

Fairfield, J. & Shtein, H. (2014). Big Data, Big Problems: Emerging Issues in the Ethics of Data Science and Journalism. Journal of mass media ethics, 29(1), pp.38-51.

(13)

Ford, H. (2014). Big Data and Small: Collaborations between ethnographers and data scientists. Big Data & Society, 1(2), pp.1-3.

Fuchs, C. (2017). From digital positivism and administrative big data analytics towards critical digital and social media research! European journal of communication, 32(1), pp.37-49. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Fuller, M. (2015). Big data: new science, new challenges, new dialogical opportunities.

Zygon, 50(3), pp.569-582.

Gil de Zúñiga, H. & Diehl, T. (2017). Citizenship, Social Media, and Big Data. Social science computer review, 35(1), pp.3-9. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Goffey, A., Pettinger, L. & Speed, E. (2014). Politics, policy and privatization in the everyday experience of big data in the NHS. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?:

qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.31-50. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.

Hammer, M. J. (2017). Research ethics in big data. Oncology nursing forum, 44(3), pp.293- 295.

Hand, M. (2014). From cyberspace to the dataverse: trajectories in digital social research.

In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.1-30. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.

Hasselbach, G. & Tranberg, P. (2016). Data ethics – the new competitive advantage.

Publishare.

Helbing, D. (2018). Societal, Economic, Ethical and Legal Challenges of the Digital Revolution: From Big Data to Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, and Manipulative Technologies. Towards Digital Enlightenment (pp.47-72), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 04-09-2019.

Herschel, R. & Miori, V. M. (2017). Ethics & Big Data. Technology in society, 49, pp.31-36.

Hillyard, S. (2014). ‘Where no-one can hear you scream’: an analysis of the potential of ‘Big Data’ for rural research in the British context. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.231-250. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.

Krotoski, A. K. (2012). Data-driven research: open data opportunities for growing knowledge, and ethical issues that arise. Insights - the UKSG Journal, 25(1), pp.28-32.

Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Larsson, A. O. (2015). Studying Big Data – ethical and methodological considerations. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.141-156. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.

(14)

Light, B., Mitchell, P. & Wikström, P. (2018). Big data, method and the ethics of location: a case study of a hookup app for men who have sex with men. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A.

& Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Lohmeier, C. (2014). The researcher and the never-ending field: reconsidering big data and digital ethnography. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.75-90. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.

Luka, M. E. & Millette, M. (2018). (Re)framing big data: activating situated knowledges and a feminist ethics of care in social media research. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. &

Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Markham, A. (2016). OKCupid data release fiasco: It’s time to rethink ethics education.

Medium. Accessed: 18-06-2018.

Markham, A. N. (2017). Troubling the concept of data in digital qualitative research. In Flick, U. (Ed.) (2017). Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection, pp.511-523. London: Sage.

Markham, A. & Buchanan, E. A. (2017). Research ethics in context: Decision making in digital research. In Schäfer, M. T. & van Es, K. (Eds.) (2017). The Datafied Society: Studying culture through data, pp.201-209. Amsterdam University Press B.V.

McQuillan, D. (2018). People’s councils for ethical machine learning. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Metcalf, J., Boyd, D. & Keller, E. (2016). Perspectives on Big Data, Ethics, and Society.

Council for Big Data, Ethics, and Society. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Metcalf, J. & Crawford, K. (2016). Where are human subjects in Big Data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1), pp.1-14.

Oboler, A., Welsh, K. & Cruz, L. (2012). The danger of big data: Social media as computational social science. First Monday, 17(7). Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Pascalev, M. (2017). Privacy exchanges: Restoring consent in privacy self-management.

Ethics and Information Technology, 19(1), pp.39-48.

Pink, S. & Lanzeni, D. (2018). Future anthropology ethics and datafication: temporality and responsibility in research. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018).

Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Prabhu, R. (2015). Big Data – big trouble? In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015).

Internet Research Ethics, pp.157-172. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.

(15)

Redon, E. D. & Centi, A. (2019). Realities of conducting digital health research: Challenges to consider. Digital Health, 5, SAGE Publications. Accessed: 03-09-2019.

Schweitzer, L. A. & Afzalan, N. (2017). Four Reasons Why AICP Needs an Open Data Ethic.

American Planning Association. Journal of the American Planning Association, 83(2), pp.161-167. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Segadal, K. U. (2015). Possibilities and limitations of Internet research: A legal framework.

In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.35-47. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.

Smith, R. J. (2014). Missed miracles and mystical connections: qualitative research, digital social science and big data. In Hillyard, S. & Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.181-204. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.

Steen-Johnsen, K. & Enjolras, B. (2015). Social research and Big Data – the tension between opportunities and realities. In Fossheim, H. & Ingierd, H. (Eds.) (2015). Internet Research Ethics, pp.122-140. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.

Sylvia IV, J. J. (2016). Little brother: how big data necessitates an ethical shift from privacy to power. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.13- 28. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Taylor, L. (2016). The ethics of big data as a public good: which public? Whose good?

Philosophical transactions - Royal Society. Mathematical, Physical and engineering sciences, 374(2083). Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Trottier, D. (2014) Big data ambivalence: visions and risks in practice. In Hillyard, S. &

Hand, M. (Eds.) (2014). Big data?: qualitative approaches to digital research, pp.51-74.

Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.

Vayena, E., Haeusermann, T., Adjekum, A. & Blasimme, A. (2018). Digital health:

meeting the ethical and policy challenges. Swiss Medical Weekly, 148(34), EMH Swiss Medical Publishers, Ltd. Accessed: 04-09-2019.

Wang, Y. (2016). Big opportunities and big concerns of big data in education. TechTrends:

Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 60(4), pp.381-384.

Weller, K. (2015). Accepting the challenges of social media research. Online Information Review, 39(3), pp.281-289.

Zimmer M. (2016). OkCupid Study Reveals the Perils of Big-Data Science. Wired.

Accessed: 14-06-2018.

Zimmer, M. (2018). Addressing conceptual gaps in big data research ethics: an application of contextual integrity. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

(16)

Zimmer, M. & Proferes, N. J. (2014). A topology of Twitter research: disciplines, methods, and ethics. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66 (3), pp.250-261.

Zook, M., S. Barocas, D., Boyd, K. Crawford, E. Keller, S. P. Gangadharan, A. Goodman, et al.

(2017). Ten simple rules for responsible big data research. PLoS Computational Biology 13 (3). Accessed: 28-09-2018.

Zwitter, A. (2014). Big Data ethics. Big Data & Society, 1(2). Accessed: 26-09-2018.

(17)

CASE

STUDIES

(18)

3. Case studies

This category contains research with focus on specific topics, such as countries and their developments (Fayoyin, 2017; Assay, 2017), Foucault’s “Governmentality” (Elichirigoity, 2019), sexual cultures (Allen, 2009), fandom (Bennett, et al., 2016), piracy (Carey, 2012), branding feminism (Bandonis & Booth, 2016), youth suicide (Eskisabel-Azpiazu, et. al.

2017) and much more. Dive into the literature in this category to learn more about previous case studies on digital research.

Aarsand, P. & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing children's corporeal privacy: ethnographic video recording as material-discursive practice. Qualitative research, 10(2), pp.249-268.

Abasi, A. R. & Taylor, M. C. (2007). Tackling the issues and challenges of using video data in adult literacy research. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 47(2), pp.289-307.

Akpojivi, U. (2017). Rethinking information privacy in a “connected” world. In Mhiripiri, N.

A. & Chari, T. (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.268-285.

Information Science Reference (ISR).

Alcántara, H. (2019). Collective construction of identity in the internet: ethical dimension and intercultural perspective. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.).

(2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.229–241.

Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 29-10-2019.

Allen, L. (2009). "Snapped": Researching the sexual cultures of schools using visual methods. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 22(5), pp.549- 561.

Amazeen, M. A. & O’Sullivan-Gavin, S. (2016). “Rogue” advertising in the digital age:

creative reputation building or industry irresponsibility? In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.123-137. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Assay, B. E. (2017). Intellectual property rights and the protection of Africa’s traditional knowledge. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T. (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.25-43. Information Science Reference (ISR).

Bakare, A. A. (2018). Digital Libraries and Copyright of Intellectual Property. Advances in Library and Information Science (pp.377-395), IGI Global. Accessed: 05-09-2019.

Balmer, C., Griffiths, F. & Dunn, J. (2015). A review of the issues and challenges involved in using participant-produced photographs in nursing research. Journal of advanced nursing, 71(7), pp.1726-1737.

Bandonis, M. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Branding feminism: corporate blogging and the shaky relationship between ideology and profitability. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.279-294. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

(19)

Banks, W. & Eble, M. (2007). Digital spaces, online environments, and human participant research: interfacing with institutional review boards. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N.

(Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.27-47. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

Barker, J. & Weller, S. (2003). “Is it fun?” Developing children centered research methods.

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23(1/2), pp.33–58.

Barratt, M. J. & Maddox, A. (2016). Active engagement with stigmatised communities through digital ethnography. Qualitative research, 16(6), pp.701-719.

Bassett, E. H. & O’Riordan, K. (2002). Ethics of Internet Research: Contesting the Human Subjects Research Model. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.233-247.

Bennett, L., Chin, B. & Jones, B. (2016). Between ethics, privacy, fandom, and social media:

new trajectories that challenge media producer/fan relations. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P.

(Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.107-122. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Bishop, L. & Gray, D. (2017). Ethical Challenges of Publishing and Sharing Social Media Research Data. In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.159- 187.

Blair, K. & Tulley, C. (2007). Whose research is it, anyway?: the challenge of developing feminist methodology in technological spaces. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.303- 317. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

Bolt, B. (2016). Whither the aesthetic alibi: ethics and the challenge of art as research in the academy. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.187-199. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.

Boydell, K. M., Solimine, C. & Jackson, S. (2016). Visually embodying psychosis: the ethics of performing difficult experiences. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.201- 210. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.

Bruckman, A. (2002). Studying the Amateur Artist: A Perspective on Disguising Data Collected in Human Subjects Research on the Internet. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.217-231. Accessed: 13-11-2019.

Brunton, F. & Nissenbaum H. (2013). Political and Ethical Perspectives on Data Obfuscation. In Hildebrandt, M. & de Vries, K. (2013). Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn, pp.164-188. New York: Routledge.

Burkholder, C. & MacEntee, K. (2016). Exploring the ethics of the participant-produced archive: the complexities of dissemination. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J.

(20)

(Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.211-224. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.

Burden, D. & Savin-Baden, M. (2019). Digital Ethics. In Burden, D. & Savin-Baden, M.

(2019). Virtual Humans – today and tomorrow, pp.181-196. Chapman and Hall/CRC.

Burnett, J., Chandler, S. & Lopez, J. (2007). A report from the digital contact zone:

collaborative research and the hybridizing of cultural mindsets. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.319-336. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

Busch, T. (2016). Corporate responsibility in the videogames industry: mapping the territory. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.63-81. New York: Peter Lang.

Butakov, S., Schherbinin, V., Diagilev, V. & Tskhay, A. (2019). Embedding plagiarism detection mechanisms into learning management systems. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.216-231. IGI Global.

Bøge, A. R. & Lauritsen, P. (2017). Reassembling Surveillance Creep. Akademisk Kvarter, 15, pp.27-39.

Carey, B. (2012). Permissible piracy? In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.164-177. New York: Peter Lang.

Casey, E. (2018). The need for translational research in digital investigation. Digital Investigation, 26 (pp.1-2), Elsevier BV. Accessed: 09-09-2019.

Chess, S. (2016). Not your mother’s video game: the role of motherhood in video game advertising. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.295-307. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Clark, A. (2011). Breaking methodological boundaries? Exploring visual, participatory methods with adults and young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(3), pp.321-330. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Clark, A. (2013). Haunted by Images? Ethical Moments and Anxieties in Visual Research.

Methodological Innovations Online, 8(2), pp.68–81.

Clark, L. S. (2016). The ethics of engagement: considering digital ethics in a critical participatory action research project with urban youth. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.167-187. New York: Peter Lang.

Clarke, R. & Taylor, K. (2018). Towards responsible data analytics: a process approach.

31ST Bled econference: digital transformation: meeting the challenges, 2018, Bled, Slovenia, conference proceedings. Pucihar, A., Kljajić Borštnar. M., Ravesteijn, P., Seitz, J. &

Bons, R.

(21)

Clemens, J. & Nash, A. (2018). Irremediability. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.29-60. London:

Routledge. Accessed: 04-09-2019.

Culver, K. B. & Mirer, M. (2016). Constrained independence: digital branded content in sports through the lens of journalism ethics. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016).

Ethics for a digital age, pp.19-39. New York: Peter Lang.

Cutter-Mackenzie, A., Edwards, S. & Quinton, H.W. (2015). Childframed video research methodologies: issues, possibilities and challenges for researching with children.

Children's Geographies, 13(3), pp.343-356.

Davidson, J., Dottin, J. W., Penna, S. L. & Robertson, S. P. (2009). Visual sources and the qualitative research dissertation: Ethics, evidence and the politics of academia--moving innovation in higher education from the center to the margins. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 10(27).

Davisson, A. (2016). Passing around women’s bodies online: identity, privacy, and free speech on Reddit. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.44-57. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

DeLuca, K. (2019). Fostering Phronesis in Digital Rhetorics. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M.

(Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics - Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.231- 247. New York: Routledge.

Diara, F. (2019). Cultural Heritage Digital Data: Future and Ethics. In Kremers, H. (2019).

Digital Cultural Heritage. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 03- 09-2019.

Dickens, L. & Butcher, M. (2016). Going public? Re-thinking visibility, ethics and recognition through participatory research praxis. Transaction of the institute of British Geographers, 41(4), pp.528–540.

Dieterle, B., Edwards, D. & Martin, P. D. (2019). Confronting Digital Aggression with an Ethics of Circulation. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.197-213. New York: Routledge.

Dineen, M. (2018). Digital Convergence and Musical Ethics. Encyclopedia of Business and Professional Ethics (pp.1-4), Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 10-09-2019.

Donoghue, G. & Miller, E. (2016). ‘I understand. I am a participant’: navigating the ‘fuzzy’

boundaries of visual methods in qualitative longitudinal research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.129-139. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.

(22)

Doyle, E. (2017). Embracing qualitative research: a visual model for nuanced research ethics oversight. Qualitative research, 17(1), pp.95-117. Accessed: 28-09-2018.

Dunseath, S., Weibel, N., Bloss, C. S. & Nebeker, C. (2018). NIH support of mobile, imaging, pervasive sensing, social media and location tracking (MISST) research: laying the foundation to examine research ethics in the digital age. Npj Digital Medicine, 1(1), Springer Nature. Accessed: 10-09-2019.

Edmonds, F., Evans, M., McQuire, S. & Chenhall, R. (2016). Ethical considerations when using visual methods in digital storytelling with aboriginal young people in Southeast Australia. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.171-184. Palgrave Macmillan:

Springer Science and Business Media.

Elgesem, D. 2002. What is Special about the Ethical Issues in Online Research? Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), pp.195-203. Accessed: 13-11-2019.

Elichirigoity, F. (2019). The internet, information machines, and the technologies of the Self. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.289–300. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 19-10-2019.

Elliott, D. & Spence, E. H. (2017). Beyond Ethics – communicating wisely. In Elliott, D. &

Spence, E. H. (2019). Ethics for a Digital Era, pp.171-189. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Accessed: 12-09-2019.

Eskisabel-Azpiazu, A., Cerezo-Menéndez, R. & Gayo-Avello, D. (2017). An ethical inquiry into youth suicide prevention using social media mining. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.227-234. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Fairfield, J. & Shtein, H. (2014). Big Data, Big Problems: Emerging Issues in the Ethics of Data Science and Journalism. Journal of mass media ethics, 29(1), pp.38-51.

Falconer, L. (2013). Situated learning in virtual simulations: Researching the authentic dimension in virtual worlds. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 24(3), pp.285-300.

Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Fayoyin, A. (2017). Electoral polling and reporting in Africa: professional and policy implications for media practice and political communication in a digital age. In Mhiripiri, N.

A. & Chari, T. (Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.164-181.

Information Science Reference (ISR).

Fernback, J. (2016). Privacy rights and data brokers: the ethics of a targeted surveillance regime. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.207. New York: Peter Lang.

(23)

Fiesler, C. & Proferes, N. (2018). “Participant” perceptions of twitter research ethics. Social media + society. Accessed: 14-10-2019.

Flick, C. (2015). Informed consent and the Facebook emotional manipulation study.

Research ethics, 12(1). Accessed: 14-10-2019.

Ford, S. (2016). Perfectly “compliant”: the devaluation of ethics in corporate communication industry discourse. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016).

Controversies in digital ethics, pp.155-171. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Fourie, P. J. (2017). Normative media theory in the digital media landscape: from media ethics to ethical communication. Communication, 43(2) (pp.109-127), Informa UK Limited. Accessed: 16-09-2019.

Franke, K. & Årnes, A. (2017). Challenges in Digital Forensics. In Flaglien, A., Sunde, I. M., Dilijonaite, A., Hamm, J., Sandvik, J. P., Bjelland, P., Franke, K. & Axelsson, S. (2017). Digital Forensics, pp.313-317. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Frohmann, B. (2018). Foucault, Deleuze, and the Ethics of Digital Networks. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (2018). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.57-68. Wilhelm Fink. Accessed: 04-09-2019.

Frosh, P. (2018). You have been tagged. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.117-136. London: Routledge.

Accessed: 04-09-2019.

Fuchs, C. (2018). “Dear Mr. Neo-Nazi, Can You Please Give Me Your Informed Consent So That I Can Quote Your Fascist Tweet?“. Questions of Social Media Research Ethics in Online Ideology Critique. In Meikle, G. (Ed.) (2018). The Routledge Companion to Media and Activism, pp.385-394. Abingdon: Routledge. Accessed: 30-10-2018.

Gallagher, John R. (2019). A Pedagogy of Ethical Interface Production Based on Virtue Ethics. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics - Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.69-84. New York: Routledge.

Gelms, B. T. (2019). Volatile Visibility. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.179-194. New York:

Routledge.

Gekker, A. (2012). Legionnaries of chaos: “anonymous” and governmental oversight of the internet. In Heider, D. & Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.178-192. New York: Peter Lang.

Goodman, K. W. (2017). Introduction: Symposium on Ethical Issues in Data Science and Digital Medicine. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 26(2) (pp.326-327), Cambridge University Press (CUP). Accessed: 16-09-2019.

(24)

Goodyear, V. A. (2017). Social media, apps and wearable technologies: navigating ethical dilemmas and procedures. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 9(3), pp.285-302.

Gray, B., Hilder, J., Macdonald, L., Tester, R., Dowell, A. & Stubbe, M. (2016). Are research ethics guidelines culturally competent? Research Ethics, 13 (1), pp.23-41. Accessed: 26- 09-2018.

Grincheva, N. (2017). Museum ethnography in the digital age: ethical considerations. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.187-194. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed:

01-10-2018.

Gruwell, L. (2019). Feminist Research on the Toxic Web. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M.

(Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.87-103.

New York: Routledge.

Gubrium, A., Fiddian-Green, A. & Hill, A. (2016). Conflicting aims and minimizing harm:

uncovering experiences of trauma in digital storytelling with young women. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods:

Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.157-170. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.

Guest, C. (2016). Cultivating reflexive research practice when using participants’

photographs as research data. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.75- 87. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.

Hagen, L. (2017). Overcoming the Privacy Challenges of Wearable Devices. Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research - dg.o '17, ACM Press. Accessed: 16-09-2019.

Halford, S. (2017). The Ethical Disruptions of Social Media Data: Tales from the Field.

In Woodfield, K. (Ed.) (2017). The ethics of online research, 2, pp.13-25.

Hea, A. K. (2007). Riding the wave: articulating a critical methodology for web research practices. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research:

technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.269-286. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

Hinkson, M. (2017). At the edges of the visual culture of exile: a glimpse from South Australia. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.93-104.

Hoffmann, A. L. & Jonas, A. (2017). Recasting justice for internet and online industry research ethics. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.3-18. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

(25)

Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N. J. & Hillman, A. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people's engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 17(3), pp.360-375.

Holt, T. J., Bossler, A. M. & Seigfried-Spellar, K. C. (2017). Legal Challenges in Digital Forensic Investigations. In Holt, T.J., Bossler, A. M. & Seigfried-Spellar, K. C. (2017).

Cybercrime and Digital Forensics, pp.571-621. London: Routledge.

Hong, S. (2018). Surveillance, sensors, and knowledge through the machine. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.137-155. London: Routledge. Accessed: 05-09-2019.

Hongladarom, S. (2017). Internet research ethics in a non-western context. In Zimmer, M.

& Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.151-163. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10- 2018.

Hutchinson, J., Martin, F. & Sinpeng, A. (2017). Chasing ISIS: network power, distributed ethics and responsible social media research. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.57-71. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Hård af Segerstad, Y., Kasperowski, D., Kullenberg, C. & Howes, C. (2017). Studying closed communities on-line: digital methods and ethical considerations beyond informed consent and anonymity. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.213-225. New York:

Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Introna, L. D. (2019). Virtual Strangers: On the Social and Ethical Conditions of Virtual Communities. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.).

(2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.95–108.

Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 16-09-2019.

Jahun, U. S. (2017). Online and Offline: The Ethical Considerations of Researching the Use of Social Media by Traditional Journalists in Northern Nigerian Newsroom. In Dobrick, F.

M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (Eds.) (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.129-133.

Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

Johnson, J. D. (2017). Ethics, Agency, and Power. In Hess, A. & Davisson, A. (Eds.) (2017).

Theorizing Digital Rhetoric, pp.196-208. New York: Routledge.

Jung, H. (2016). Fuzzy boundaries when using “mental mapping” methods to trade the experiences of immigrant women in South Korea. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. &

Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.31-44. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.

(26)

Kantanen, H. & Manninen, J. (2016). Hazy boundaries: virtual communities and research ethics. Media and communication, 4(4), pp.86-96.

Kelly, P., Marshall, S. J., Badland, H., Kerr, J., Oliver, M. & Doherty, A. R. et al. (2013). An Ethical Framework for Automated, Wearable Cameras in Health Behavior Research.

American journal of preventive medicine, 44(3), pp.314-319. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Kennedy, K. & Wilson, N. (2019). The banality of digital aggression. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds.) (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.214-230. New York: Routledge.

Kergel, D. (2017). The Postmodern Dialogue and the Ethics of Digital Based Learning. In Kergel, D., Heidkamp, B., Telléus, P. K., Rachwal, T. & Nowakowski, S. (Eds.) (2017). The Digital Turn in Higher Education, pp.47-57. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

Kerpen, D., Dorgeist, M. & Zantis, S. (2017). Intersecting the Digital Maze. Considering Ethics in Cloud-Based Services’ Research. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M.

(2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.143-152. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

Khan, Z. R. (2019). What category are they anyway? Proposing a new taxonomy for factors that may influence students’ likelihood to E-cheat. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.148-175. IGI Global.

Khoja, N., (2016). Situating Children’s Voices: Considering the Context When Conducting Research with Young Children. Children & Society, 30, pp.314-322.

Kong, E., Hog, S. C., Gussen, B. F., Turner, J. & Abawi, L. (2019). Strategies on addressing contract cheating: a case study from an Australian regional university. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing:

breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.176-199. IGI Global.

Kosinski, M., Matz, S. C., Gosling, S. D., Popov, V. & Stillwell, D. (2015). Facebook as a research tool for the social sciences: Opportunities, challenges, ethical considerations, and practical guidelines. The American psychologist, 70(6), pp.543-556.

Kouppanou, A. & Standish, P. (2013). Ethics, Phenomenology and Ontology. In Price, S., Jewitt, C. & Brown, B. (Eds.) (2013). The SAGE Handbook of Digital Technology Research.

SAGE publications, pp.102-116.

Krotoski, A. K. (2012). Data-driven research: open data opportunities for growing knowledge, and ethical issues that arise. Insights - the UKSG Journal, 25(1), pp.28-32.

Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Krug, M. & Heuser, S. (2018). Ethics in the field: research practice in audio-visual studies.

Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018.

(27)

Lagerkvist, A. (2018). The internet is always awake. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.189-209. London:

Larsen, M. C. & Glud, L. N. (2013). Nye medier, nye metoder, nye etiske udfordringer.

Metode & Forskningsdesign, 1. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Lauber-Rönsberg, A. (2017). Data Protection Laws, Research Ethics and Social Sciences.

In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.29-44. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

Laursen, D., Sandvik, K. & Brügger, N. (2017). Metoder til indsamling af internetmateriale og deres effekt på senere analyser med Facebook som eksempel. I Drotner, K. & Iversen, S. M. (Red.) (2017). Digitale metoder: At skabe, analysere og dele data, s.31-49.

Frederiksberg. Samfundslitteratur.

Lenette, C. (2017). Using digital storytelling in participatory research with refugee women.

London: SAGE.

Lindgren, A. (2012). Ethical issues in pedagogical documentation: Representations of children through digital technology. International Journal of Early Childhood, 44(3), pp.327-340.

Light, B., Mitchell, P. & Wikström, P. (2018). Big data, method and the ethics of location: a case study of a hookup app for men who have sex with men. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A.

& Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Literat, I. & Brough, M. (2019). From Ethical to Equitable Social Media Technologies:

Amplifying Underrepresented Youth Voices in Digital Technology Design. Journal of Media Ethics, 34(3) (pp.132-145), Informa UK Limited. Accessed: 03-09-2019.

Lunceford, B. (2016). Programs or people? Participation and the ethics of hacktivism. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.77-90. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D. & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical Use of Social Media to Facilitate Qualitative Research. Qualitative health research, 25(1), pp.99-109.

Luka, M. E. & Millette, M. (2018). (Re)framing big data: activating situated knowledges and a feminist ethics of care in social media research. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. &

Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Luka, M. E., Millette, M. & Wallace, J. (2017). A feminist perspective on ethical digital methods. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for

(28)

the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.21-36. New York: Peter Lang.

Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Magalhães, J. C. (2018). Do algorithms shape character? Considering algorithmic ethical subjectivation. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Markham, A. N. (2018). Afterword: Ethics as Impact—Moving From Error-Avoidance and Concept-Driven Models to a Future-Oriented Approach. Social media and society, 4(3).

Markham, A. N. (2005). The methods, politics, and ethics of representation in online ethnography. In Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.) (2005). The sage handbook of qualitative research, 3, pp.793-820. Sage.

Martinez-Martin, N., Insel, T. R., Dagum, P., Greely, H. T. & Cho, M. K. (2018). Data mining for health: staking out the ethical territory of digital phenotyping. Npj Digital Medicine, 1(1), Springer Nature. Accessed: 04-09-2019.

Massanari, A. L. (2018). Rethinking research ethics, power, and the risk of visibility in the

“Alt-Right” gaze. In Markham, A. N., Herman, A. & Tiidenberg, K. (Eds.) (2018). Ethics as method. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

McGeeney, E. (2015). Live tweeting and building the digital archive; #NFQLR – who and what is it for? International journal of social research methodology, 18(3), pp.307-319.

McKee, H. A. & Porter, J. E. (2009). The ethics of Internet research: a rhetorical, case-based process. New York: Peter Lang.

Metcalf, J. & Crawford, K. (2016). Where are human subjects in Big Data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1), pp.1-14.

Miko-Schefzig, K. & Reiter, C. (2018). Participatory Organization Research in the Context of the Police: Ethical Research with Vulnerable Groups Using the Example of Detention Centers. Qualitative social research, 19(3). Accessed: 4-10-2018.

Miller, V. (2018). The ethics of digital being. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence - Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence in Digital Culture, pp.171-186. London: Routledge.

Accessed: 03-09-2019.

Moats, D. & Perriam, J. (2017). How does it feel to be visualized? In Zimmer, M. & Kinder- Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.255-265. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Monks, H., Cardoso, P., Papageorgiou, A., Carolan, C., Costello, L. & Thomas, L. (2015).

Young people's views regarding participation in mental health and wellbeing research through social media. International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(1), pp.4-19.

Accessed: 26-09-2018.

(29)

Mukherjee, I. (2017). Case study of ethical and privacy concerns in a digital ethnography of South Asian blogs against intimate partner violence. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.203-212. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Mullins, M. & Doyle, E. (2010). Establishing a research ethics committee in a business school: a chairperson’s perspective. Research ethics, 6(4).

Neilson, T. (2018). Digital Media, Conventional Methods: Using Video Interviews to Study the Labor of Digital Journalism. In Levenberg, L., Neilsen, T. & Rheams, D. (Eds.) (2018).

Research Methods for the Digital Humanities, pp.151-171. Springer International Publishing. Accessed: 09-09-2019.

Nenadic, I. (2017). Journalists on Twitter: Reconfiguring Professional Identity, Reconsidering Research Ethics – The Case of Croatia. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. &

Hagen, L. M. (2017). Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.111-117. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

Nielsen, L. Y. & Larsen, M. C. (2018). Metodiske tilgange til digital ungdomsforskning:

Refleksioner over forskning i unges brug af weblogs og fotodelingsapplikationen Snapchat.

I Pless, M. & Sørensen, N. U. (Red.). Ungeperspektiver: Tænkninger og tilgange i ungdomsforskningen, 7, pp.173-195. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Ungdomsliv.

Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R. & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). E-Research: Ethics, Security, Design, and Control in Psychological Research on the Internet. Journal of social issues, 58(1), pp.161–176. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Oakley, R. L. & Singh, R. (2019). Examining ethical decision making behavior in E-Learning systems: a socio-technical analysis. In Information resources management association (Eds.) (2019). Scholarly ethics and publishing: breakthroughs in research and practice, pp.52-68. IGI Global.

Olivero, N. & Lunt, P. (2004). The Case of E-Mail Qualitative Interviews. In Buchanan, E. A.

(Ed.) (2004). Readings in virtual research ethics: issues and controversies, pp.101-113.

Hershey: Idea Group Inc.

Pandey, I. (2007). Researching (with) the postnational “other”: ethics, methodologies, and qualitative studies of literacy. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.107-125. Cresskill, N.J.:

Hampton Press.

Pangestu, M. & Dewi, G. (2017). 13. Indonesia and the digital economy: creative destruction, opportunities and challenges. In Edwin Jurriens (Ed.) (2017). Digital Indonesia: Connectivity and Divergence, pp. 227–255. Singapore: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute Singapore.

Peters, J. (2016). Considering and constraining the power of content hosts. In Vanacker, B. & Heider, D. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics for a digital age, pp.105-122. New York: Peter Lang.

(30)

Pimienta, D. (2019). At the boundaries of ethics and cultures: virtual communities as an open ended process carrying the will for social change (the >>MISTICA<< experience). In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.). (2019). Localizing the Internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.205–228. Leiden, The Netherlands:

Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 18-09-2019.

Power, K. (2019). Ethical problems in virtual research: Enmeshing the blurriness with Twitter data. E-Learning and Digital Media, 16(3), pp.196-207. SAGE Publications.

Accessed: 03-09-2019.

Proctor, D. (2018). Cybernetic animism. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.227-241. London: Routledge.

Accessed: 04-09-2019.

Puurveen, G., Phinney, A., Cox, S. & Purves, B. (2016). Ethical considerations in the use of video observations in dementia end-of-life care research. In Warr, D., Guillemin, M., Cox, S. & Waycott, J. (Eds.) (2016). Ethics and Visual Research Methods: Theory, Methodology, and Practice, pp.105-115. Palgrave Macmillan: Springer Science and Business Media.

Ragas, J. (2019). Digital Resources: Digital Peru. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin American History. London: Oxford University Press. Accessed: 03-09-2019.

Reidenberg, J. R. (2000). Resolving Conflicting International Data Privacy Rules in Cyberspace. Cyberspace and privacy: A new legal paradigm? 52(5), pp.1315-1376.

Rice, J. (2019). Professorial Outrage. In Reyman, J. & Sparby, E. M. (Eds). (2019). Digital Ethics – Rhetoric and Responsibility in Online Aggression, pp.123-140. New York:

Routledge.

Richardson, L. (2018). Ethical Challenges in Digital Public Archaeology. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology, 1(1) (pp.64-73), Ubiquity Press, Ltd. Accessed: 04- 09-2019.

Richardson, I., Hjorth, L., Strengers, Y. & Balmford, W. (2017). Careful surveillance at play:

human-animal relations and mobile media in the home. In Cruz, E. G., Sumartojo, S. & Pink, S. (Eds.) (2017). Refiguring techniques in digital visual research. Springer, pp.105-116.

Rickly, R. (2007). Messy contexts: research as a rhetorical situation. In McKee, H. A. &

DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.377-397. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

Roberts, D. (2017). ‘Getting What They Deserve’: Digital Media Readers Comment on the Cause of Detroit’s Bankruptcy. In Dobrick, F. M., Fischer, J. & Hagen, L. M. (2017).

Research Ethics in the Digital Age, pp.107-110. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

Robson, J. (2017). Participant anonymity and participant observations: situating the researcher within digital ethnography. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017).

(31)

Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.195- 202. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Rogers, R. (2016). The harm of video games: the ethics behind regulating minors’ access to violent video games in light of the supreme court ruling. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.216-230. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Rogers, R., Labadie, M. & Pole, K., (2016). Balancing voice and protection in literacy studies with young children. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 16(1), pp.34-59.

Romberger, J. (2007). An ecofeminist methodology: studying the ecological dimensions of the digital environment. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.249-267. Cresskill, N.J.:

Hampton Press.

Sabao, C. & Chingwaramusee, V. R. (2017). Citizen journalism on Facebook and the challenges of media regulation in Zimbabwe: Baba Jukwa. In Mhiripiri, N. A. & Chari, T.

(Eds.) (2017). Media Law, Ethics, and Policy in the Digital Age, pp.193-206. Information Science Reference (ISR).

Sapienza, F. (2007). Ethos and research positionality in studies of virtual communities. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.89-106. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

Saunders, B., Kitzinger, J. & Kitzinger, C. (2015). Participant Anonymity in the Internet Age: From Theory to Practice. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), pp.125-137.

Schaer, P. (2017). Living labs – an ethical challenge for researchers and platform operators.

In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.167-176. New York: Peter Lang. Accessed:

01-10-2018.

Schinzel, B. (2019). Gendered views on the ethics of computer professionals. In Frühbauer, J. J., Hausmanninger, T. & Capurro, R. (Eds.) (2019). Localizing the internet – ethical aspects in intercultural perspective, pp.121–134. Leiden: The Netherlands: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Accessed: 18-09-2019.

Schwarz, J. A. (2018). Umwelt and individuation. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.61-80. London:

Schwartz, M. (2018). Thrownness, vulnerability, care. In Lagerkvist, A. (Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.81-99. London:

(32)

Shoenberger, H. (2017). Targeted Digital Advertising and Privacy. In Rodgers, S. &

Thorson, E. (2017). Digital Advertising – theory and research, pp.300-309. New York:

Routledge.

Seko, Y. & Lewis, S. P. (2017). “We tend to err on the side of caution”: ethical challenges facing Canadian research ethics boards when overseeing internet research. In Zimmer, M.

& Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.133-147.New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10- 2018.

Shuter, J. & Burroughs, B. (2017). The ethics of sensory ethnography: virtual reality fieldwork in zones of conflict. In Zimmer, M. & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (Eds.) (2017). Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age. New Challenges, Cases, and Contexts, pp.281-285.

New York: Peter Lang. Accessed: 01-10-2018.

Sicart, M. (2012). Instrumental play of the moral risks of gamification. In Heider, D. &

Massanari, A. L. (Eds.) (2012). Digital ethics: research & practice, pp.210-230. New York:

Peter Lang.

Sidler, M. (2007). Playing scavenger and gazer with scientific discourse: opportunities and ethics for online research. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.71-86. Cresskill, N.J.:

Hampton Press.

Smith, B. (2007). Researching hybrid literacies: methodological explorations of

“ethnography” and the practices of the cybertariat. In McKee, H. A. & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.) (2007). Digital Writing research: technologies, methodologies and ethical issues, pp.127- 149. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.

Sparks, H., Collins, F. L. & Kearns, R. (2016). Reflecting on the risks and ethical dilemmas of digital research. Geoforum, 77, pp.40-46. Accessed: 26-09-2018.

Stroud, S. R. (2016). “Be a bully to beat a bully”: Twitter ethics, online identity, and the culture of quick revenge. In Davisson, A. L. & Booth, P. (Eds.) (2016). Controversies in digital ethics, pp.264-278. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Sugiura, L., Wiles, R. & Pope, C. (2016). Ethical challenges in online research: Public/private perceptions. Research Ethics, 13(3-4). Accessed: 14-10-2019.

Sumiala, J. (2018). Digital rituals and the quest for existential security. In Lagerkvist, A.

(Ed.) (2018). Digital Existence – Ontology, Ethics and Transcendence for Digital Culture, pp.210-226. London: Routledge. Accessed: 03-09-2019.

Suomela, T., Chee, F., Berendt, B. & Rockwell, G. (2019). Applying an Ethics of Care to Internet Research: Gamergate and Digital Humanities. Digital Studies/Le champ numérique, 9(1), Open Library of the Humanities. Accessed: 03-09-2019.