As the widespread use of the internet is still relatively new to us all and particularly to it’s use in research, guidelines and ethics on how internet can be used in research may be slightly underdeveloped and misunderstood. Therefore it is important guidelines and set and researchers are aware and understand these guidelines.
It could be argued that if somebody posts something online, this is available for all to see and so should be open to the use of researchers to analyse and use as part of their research. When somebody creates a webpage or something similar on the internet, generally they can select their own privacy settings. Therefore if somebody is allowing the rest of the world to view their webpage, this in itself could be seen as giving consent.
However as stated in BPS ethical guidelines, informed consent is needed and even if a public webpage is taken as consent, this still would not qualify for informed consent as the individual would not be aware they were a part of research or what the intention of the study were.
Researchers should also be cautious when using internet sources as there will obviously be many false claims which cannot be taken at face value. On the other side of the argument researchers should also be aware of the impact their research could have on the internet and their various sources used on the internet.
Whilst I think using the internet as a secondary source is very valuble as almost everything can be found on the internet, I also think that many of the problems with qualitative data should also be noted such as subjectivity and false information.
laurenpsychology 
I think your blog is very relevant when it comes to looking at the internet as a source of research. The fact that information is becoming so readily available for example, recent statistics have shown that in 2011 over 77% of household have internet access and 6 million people used their phones to connect to the internet for the first time in the UK! (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/rdit2/internet-access—households-and-individuals/2011/stb-internet-access-2011.html) That is a large statistic and that is why it is important that when researchers are gathering information that they do not accidently include false information in their report. Internet fraud is a form of fraud which has been recently discovered. This type of fraud is when personal information is stolen and published without consent and the information can be fake. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_fraud) This is therefore violating ethics on behalf of the study by providing false information to the participant even though you may not be aware of it. This is why it is important the when the internet is used to gain research that the sites are secure and 100% legit. Nice blog overall 🙂
Good choice of topic – something ive found interesting.
You’ve mentioned that posting the webpage in the first place, does not qualify as informed consent according to the BPS. I agree with this to a large extent. As you mentioned further on, false claims are made, so how can researchers be sure these people are who they say they are. A child may use facebook, for instance, and actually change their date of birth, to allow them to use such a site. In this case, if the researcher were to use any data they collected from this person, they are actually using false data, not gaining the correct form of consent and also using a child for their research. This brings up critical ethical issues, and would have a huge damaging effect on their research.
However, I agree with your conclusion that as a secondary source, the internet is very valuable. It is just worth being cautious when using it, and probably only using it as something as a ‘last resort’, as primary research is far more reliable.
I really like your choice of topic, and that you have presented both sides of the argument. Personally, I believe that once you have posted something on a public forum such as facebook or other social media site then researchers should be allowed access to it. I am well aware of all the ethical implications of what I am suggesting, such as informed consent (which you have already mentioned) and debriefing. It is very difficult to debrief every single piece of information that researcher have taken from the internet.
However, I still feel that once somebody has posted information for the public eye then researcher should have every right to access this and use it. It is the same as when researchers use CCTV cameras to access peoples shopping habits. Personally I find this ethically sound.
But, having said that I to realise that there can be many false claims on the interent and therefore agree with your conclusion that a researcher should be cautious when using the interent as a source of data, and it is probably best used as a secondary source.
This was an interesting topic choice and I found it interesting and informative. The main argument based on informed consent was well thought out and structured and I liked how the BPS was also mentioned. However you could of explained and analysed a few other ethical principles such as deception and harm and how they would apply to the internet, and in particular, websites. Would harm be classed as someone leaving false claims on a website, or would it be more based on nasty and unacceptable behavior in order to get material for research? Overall a very interesting topic and a great post to read 🙂
Very good blog. Although I know that the internet is a good source for psychologists to collect data, what with the vast amount of people know using the internet and blogging. I do worry that we could be getting ahead of ourselves a little. Rodham and Gavin (2006) said that conducting research online has only just started. Psychologist should be clear what the rules and regulations are of conducting online studies, before proceeding with it. I have read the ethical guidelines set out by the Internet Mediated Research (IMR) myself, and it was quite confusing. I believe psychologists should set up their own page if they wish to collect data, and simply post the link on sites where their target population are most likely to look.
Hey . I totally support your point of view that people agree for they data to be viewed by public by posting something on fb, blogs etc. Therefore if anyone is allowed to read what they have posted, the research should have the same right as well. Although informed consent (that you mentioned) is not given to the potential participants, people agree to the terms and conditions of the website . They have got a choice to make their post visible only to them if they do not wish for their data to be private or include disclosure. Furthermore some of the quantitative psychological researcher did not obtain informed consent and were still considered as ethical. For example Sherif (1969) conducted study on subway in New York, where he investigated bystander effect. The confederates of the experiment collapsed and they observed if any person will engage in helping behaviour. Therefore sometimes it is impossible to obtain consent due to the nature of the study. When conducting online study , participants could edit they posts to make them look better and therefore confound the study.
On the other hand like you said researcher is taking greater risk of his findings not being reliable due to anonymity across the internet (people can write anything, not only the truth about themselves). As you said that would be qualitative research it brings up the disadvantages of that kind of research. Such as : researcher might only look for information that support his theory and therefore reporting fake results. . That would make his research having low reliability and validity. For example qualitative research ; case studies by Freud. Many critics would be fast to point out that he only reported things that supported his theory and ignored other explanations.
There are also different ethics that you could maybe expand a bit more in future but overall I really liked your post .
The wonderful thing about the internet is that anyone can post anything to anyone anywhere. The problem with the internet is that anyone can post anything about anything uncensored. If we dealt with the lead problem regarding the internet, we would be in danger of destroying what is so unique and useful about it. Although you raise the relevant point of internet resources being subjective, the fact remains that this is a well- known issue regarding the use of internet based information. I believe it is a case of reader beware – we know that some websites are providing correct information. For example, anything (papers, findings etc.) posted on the Bangor university webpage is in all likelihood legitimate. As the person looking for information it does unfortunately fall on their shoulders to gauge the legitimacy of the webpage, author and information. Ironically, here is a webpage written by some guy explaining how to do this: http://www.virtualsalt.com/evalu8it.htm
Enjoyed your topic very much!
The Internet!!! It keeps coming back to this for some reason. But They way I look at it especially with the issue of informed consent, there are just certain things that people need to get over. For instance if someone was trying to investigate how social network sites work and how people act on these sites, I really do not see the problem of that researcher using such information just as long as they don’t hack into the personal places, i.e. private messages or inboxes!!!. I mean people literally nowadays just leave their whole lives out in the open for everyone to see and yet when that information is used in research or any other things, people just get into a fit!!! The other points have already been pointed out that for the researchers themselves they need to beware of the type of information they borrow. But when it comes to guidelines of internet use as a source of data, I think that the boundaries should be kept only to what is freely accessible. Hacking to get information is crossing the line, just as the news of the world crossed the line by hacking into people’s personal files to get their story!!! Therefore a good researcher with GOOd morals will know or should know what is sensitive information which requires informed consent and which does not. The internet is a gowing thing each time and constantly changing and people also are loosing a grip on keep personal information to themselves, so if we are willing to publish our lives out there we definitely not think that it ends there. Maybe we need to start thinking twice. So when it comes to ethics in this sense, it all depends really.
I agree that the internet can be a risky source of information since anyone can write whatever they want without any real censorship; but, this shouldn’t be a problem if a researcher properly examines the source they use. If used properly, the internet can be used to find almost any piece of information required, and much more quickly than it would be to read books to find the information. Also, as I mentioned before, the lack of censorship is a major issue with information gathering on the internet but this can also be a major advantage since people cannot be silenced when their views differ from the generally accepted viewpoint.
A different topic and very interesting one.
Qualitative data sources come from observations, interviews, questionnaires, documents and texts, researcher’s impressions and reactions (Myers 2009). Internet indeed can be a very useful way to collect data for researchers but also a quite dangerous one. For most of the time, you do not really know how the information is collected and where the info. is coming from. Researchers have to be really careful as in terms of fasle data, I mean even the greatest, most popular search tools for finding info. on the internet – WiXipedXa can be edited by anyone, ANYONE. The accuracy of the info. is very questionable.
Internet is a useful tool because forums could be formed, so that Psychologists from all over the world can exchange, discuss, consult and express their opinions and share their recent discovery of human behaviour. This method is a rich source of qualitative data, and for researchers who are interested in understanding the experiences and even views of patients and others. Time differences and distances are not a problem in the internet world. However, like you have mentioned, it does raises ethical issues, particularly concerning informed consent and the privacy of research subjects, the boundaries between public and private spaces are rather unclear on the internet.