德国、奥地利和瑞士以实践者为中心的计算社会科学伦理政策路线图。

IF 2.8 1区 哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-05 DOI:10.1080/08989621.2024.2420811
Seliem El-Sayed
{"title":"德国、奥地利和瑞士以实践者为中心的计算社会科学伦理政策路线图。","authors":"Seliem El-Sayed","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2420811","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Computational Social Science (CSS) utilizes large digital datasets and computational methods to study human behavior, raising ethical concerns about data privacy, informed consent, and potential misuse.<b>Methods:</b> This study employs a constructivist grounded theory approach, analyzing 15 in-depth interviews with CSS practitioners in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. These countries share a European legal context regarding data privacy and hereby provide a comparable regulatory environment for examining ethical considerations.<b>Results:</b> Findings highlight key challenges in CSS research, including power imbalances with data providers, uncertainties around surveillance and data privacy (especially with longitudinal data), and limitations of current ethics frameworks. Researchers face tensions between established ethical principles and practical realities, often feeling disempowered and lacking support from ethics boards due to their limited CSS expertise. Regulatory ambiguity further discourages research due to fear of sanctions.<b>Conclusions:</b> To foster responsible CSS practices, this paper recommends establishing specialized ethics boards with CSS expertise. It also advocates for acknowledging CSS's unique nature in research policy by developing tailored data guidelines and providing legal certainty through clear guidelines. Grounding recommendations in practitioners' experiences, this study offers actionable steps to help enable ethical CSS research.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A practitioner-centered policy roadmap for ethical computational social science in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.\",\"authors\":\"Seliem El-Sayed\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08989621.2024.2420811\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Computational Social Science (CSS) utilizes large digital datasets and computational methods to study human behavior, raising ethical concerns about data privacy, informed consent, and potential misuse.<b>Methods:</b> This study employs a constructivist grounded theory approach, analyzing 15 in-depth interviews with CSS practitioners in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. These countries share a European legal context regarding data privacy and hereby provide a comparable regulatory environment for examining ethical considerations.<b>Results:</b> Findings highlight key challenges in CSS research, including power imbalances with data providers, uncertainties around surveillance and data privacy (especially with longitudinal data), and limitations of current ethics frameworks. Researchers face tensions between established ethical principles and practical realities, often feeling disempowered and lacking support from ethics boards due to their limited CSS expertise. Regulatory ambiguity further discourages research due to fear of sanctions.<b>Conclusions:</b> To foster responsible CSS practices, this paper recommends establishing specialized ethics boards with CSS expertise. It also advocates for acknowledging CSS's unique nature in research policy by developing tailored data guidelines and providing legal certainty through clear guidelines. Grounding recommendations in practitioners' experiences, this study offers actionable steps to help enable ethical CSS research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50927,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2024.2420811\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2024.2420811","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:计算社会科学(CSS计算社会科学(CSS)利用大型数字数据集和计算方法研究人类行为,引发了有关数据隐私、知情同意和潜在滥用的伦理问题:本研究采用建构主义基础理论方法,分析了对德国、奥地利和瑞士 CSS 从业人员的 15 次深入访谈。这些国家在数据隐私方面拥有相同的欧洲法律背景,因此为研究伦理问题提供了可比的监管环境:研究结果凸显了 CSS 研究面临的主要挑战,包括与数据提供者之间的权力不平衡、监控和数据隐私(尤其是纵向数据)的不确定性以及当前伦理框架的局限性。研究人员面临着既定伦理原则与实际现实之间的矛盾,由于他们在 CSS 方面的专业知识有限,他们常常感到无能为力,也得不到伦理委员会的支持。由于担心受到制裁,法规的模糊性进一步阻碍了研究的进行:为了促进负责任的 CSS 实践,本文建议成立具有 CSS 专业知识的专门伦理委员会。本文还主张在研究政策中承认 CSS 的独特性,制定有针对性的数据指南,并通过明确的指导方针提供法律确定性。本研究以实践者的经验为基础提出了建议,并提供了可操作的步骤,以帮助开展符合伦理的 CSS 研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A practitioner-centered policy roadmap for ethical computational social science in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.

Background: Computational Social Science (CSS) utilizes large digital datasets and computational methods to study human behavior, raising ethical concerns about data privacy, informed consent, and potential misuse.Methods: This study employs a constructivist grounded theory approach, analyzing 15 in-depth interviews with CSS practitioners in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. These countries share a European legal context regarding data privacy and hereby provide a comparable regulatory environment for examining ethical considerations.Results: Findings highlight key challenges in CSS research, including power imbalances with data providers, uncertainties around surveillance and data privacy (especially with longitudinal data), and limitations of current ethics frameworks. Researchers face tensions between established ethical principles and practical realities, often feeling disempowered and lacking support from ethics boards due to their limited CSS expertise. Regulatory ambiguity further discourages research due to fear of sanctions.Conclusions: To foster responsible CSS practices, this paper recommends establishing specialized ethics boards with CSS expertise. It also advocates for acknowledging CSS's unique nature in research policy by developing tailored data guidelines and providing legal certainty through clear guidelines. Grounding recommendations in practitioners' experiences, this study offers actionable steps to help enable ethical CSS research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
14.70%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.
期刊最新文献
Procrastination and inconsistency: Expressions of concern for publications with compromised integrity. A policy toolkit for authorship and dissemination policies may benefit NIH research consortia. A randomized trial alerting authors, with or without coauthors or editors, that research they cited in systematic reviews and guidelines has been retracted. Citation bias, diversity, and ethics. Time-based changes in authorship trend in research-intensive universities in Malaysia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1