Search

Internet research ethics is an intimidating field for a new researcher. Not only does it mobilize legal and ethical knowledge about data protection, but it also entails making case-by-case judgment calls in a shifting and yet uncodified domain. By detailing the specific ethical choices made in a study of online antifeminist communities, and discussing the rationale and debates behind them, this article aims at making this process easier for future researchers who wish to collect data from established online communities. To that effect, it presents an approach that attempts to reconcile legal and institutional requirements, scholarly recommendations, and peer practice. L’éthique de la recherche sur Internet est un domaine intimidant pour les nouveaux chercheurs. Non seulement elle mobilise des connaissances légales et éthiques sur la protection des données, mais elle implique aussi d’effectuer des jugements au cas par cas dans un domaine encore trop peu codifié. En détaillant les choix éthiques effectués dans le cadre d’une étude de communautés antiféministes en ligne, et la justification de ces choix, cet article vise à faciliter ce processus pour les futurs chercheurs désirant récolter les données de communautés en ligne. Pour ce faire, il expose une démarche qui tente de réconcilier les injonctions légales et institutionnelles, les recommandations des sociétés savantes, et les usages de la recherche sur Internet.

ResumoNeste artigo, apoiando-me num conjunto de obras recentes, pretendo fornecer subsídios para “situar” os comitês universitários de ética (CEPs) no Brasil dentro dum contexto político e acadêmico mais amplo. Primeiro, ao rever a narrativa de origem dos CEPs, situando o surgimento deles nos EUA dos anos 1950 e 1960, sugiro que esse modelo seja mais adequado à resolução de riscos legais da pesquisa científica do que à garantia mais abrangente do proceder ético. Em segundo lugar, evoco estilos e espaços “alternativos” de participação popular no debate ético que permitem estranhar a ênfase dos CEPs em mecanismos de participação pontual e individualizada. Em terceiro lugar, considero a dimensão transnacional dos esforços para regular pesquisas científicas envolvendo sujeitos humanos, especialmente na indústria farmacêutica. Finalmente, trato dos debates que circundam a aplicação do modelo dos CEPs à pesquisa em ciências humanas, sublinhando algumas provocações políticas que, especialmente na área de antropologia, têm levado a novas e desafiadoras perspectivas sobre a ética em pesquisa. Meu objetivo é contribuir para um arsenal de abordagens que combata receitas fáceis, garantindo que o debate sobre os modos de regulação da ética na pesquisa científica se mantenha aberto a uma diversidade de possibilidades criativas. AbstractIn this article, drawing on recent studies, we propose to situate the university-related ethical review boards in Brazil within a wider political and academic context. First, by re-examining origin narratives, focusing now on the 50s and 60s in the USA, we suggest that these boards are better adapted to the resolution of legal risks concerning scientific research than to the broader aim of guaranteeing ethical procedures. Second, we consider alternative styles and spaces of popular participation in ethical debates that allow us to rethink the Review Boards’ emphasis on mechanisms of episodic and individualized participation. Third, we consider the transnational dimension of efforts to regulate scientific research involving human beings, especially in the pharmaceutical industry. Finally, we look at debates surrounding the application of the Review Board model to the social sciences, highlighting political provocations that, especially in the area of anthropology, have given rise to new and challenging perspectives on research ethics. By combatting simplistic solutions, this article’s ultimate objective is to assure ongoing debate on the creative diversity of possibilities for guaranteeing ethical procedures in scientific research.

Much of published research in psychology has been found irreproducible, possibly caused in part by questionable research practices. Open practices have been suggested as a way to combat these issues. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of declared intent to use open practices in Swedish human subjects research. We investigated the occurrence of declared intent to use open practices in a sample of 102 applications to regional ethical review boards (ERBs) in Sweden approved in 2013. Specifically, we investigated the prevalences of declared intent in applications to (1) publish the report with open access, (2) openly publish research materials, (3) openly publish data, and (4) preregister the study. 3% of applications stated an intention to publish open reports, and 5% included references to preregistrations. Statements of intent to publish data and/or materials openly were not found in any applications. A significant difference between types of open practices was identified; however, we observed no statistically significant differences in pairwise comparisons. One cause of low prevalences might be that researchers are disincentivized to use open practices. Future studies should use more recent ERB applications and larger samples.