Sensitive Topics, Missing Data, and Refusal in Social Network Studies: An Ethical Examination
Sensitive Topics, Missing Data, and Refusal in Social Network Studies: An Ethical Examination
复制标题
社交网络研究中的敏感话题、缺失数据和拒绝：伦理审查
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
R. Langhout
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Erin Rose Ellison;R. Langhout
我们在一项社会网络研究中描述了我们的伦理驱动过程，该研究涉及社会正义联盟组织者对种族主义、阶级主义、性别歧视、异性恋歧视、顺性性别歧视、残疾歧视和其他形式的压迫的责任。在数据收集过程中，一些潜在的参与者没有回复电子邮件，还有一些人明确拒绝参与研究。所有的拒绝都来自有色人种女性。我们面临着一个道德困境：我们是否应该继续寻求那些尚未回应的人的参与，希望从网络中招募更多的有色人种女性，这样她们的观点就不会被标记化？或者，我们是否应该停止询问那些多次联系的人，这将损害社交网络数据和分析？鉴于我们的框架和我们的社区心理学（CP）价值观，我们描述了当前社会网络研究伦理讨论的不足之处。我们列出了一些有助于我们思考这个挑战的文献；我们看了看共产党之外关于拒绝的非殖民化文献。经验教训包括倾听拒绝的可能含义，在设计研究时考虑参与者的参与程度和劳动要求。
We describe our ethics-driven process of addressing missing data within a social network study about accountability for racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, cis-sexism, ableism, and other forms of oppression among social justice union organizers. During data collection, some would-be participants did not return emails and others explicitly refused to engage in the research. All refusals came from women of color. We faced an ethical dilemma: Should we continue to seek participation from those who had not yet responded, with the hopes of recruiting more women of color from within the network so their perspectives would not be tokenized? Or, should we stop asking those who had been contacted multiple times, which would compromise the social network data and analysis? We delineate ways in which current discussions of the ethics of social network studies fell short, given our framework and our community psychology (CP) values. We outline literature that was helpful in thinking through this challenge; we looked outside of CP to the decolonization literature on refusal. Lessons learned include listening for the possible meanings of refusals and considering the level of engagement and the labor required of participants when designing research studies.
影响因子：
16.4
作者：
Steele, CM
通讯作者：
Steele, CM