skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: When research is the context: Cross-platform user expectations for social media data reuse
Social media provides unique opportunities for researchers to learn about a variety of phenomena—it is often publicly available, highly accessible, and affords more naturalistic observation. However, as research using social media data has increased, so too has public scrutiny, highlighting the need to develop ethical approaches to social media data use. Prior work in this area has explored users’ perceptions of researchers’ use of social media data in the context of a single platform. In this paper, we expand on that work, exploring how platforms and their affordances impact how users feel about social media data reuse. We present results from three factorial vignette surveys, each focusing on a different platform—dating apps, Instagram, and Reddit—to assess users’ comfort with research data use scenarios across a variety of contexts. Although our results highlight different expectations between platforms depending on the research domain, purpose of research, and content collected, we find that the factor with the greatest impact across all platforms is consent—a finding which presents challenges for big data researchers. We conclude by offering a sociotechnical approach to ethical decision-making. This approach provides recommendations on how researchers can interpret and respond to platform norms and affordances to predict potential data use sensitivities. The approach also recommends that researchers respond to the predominant expectation of notification and consent for research participation by bolstering awareness of data collection on digital platforms.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1704369
PAR ID:
10463680
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Big Data & Society
Volume:
10
Issue:
1
ISSN:
2053-9517
Page Range / eLocation ID:
205395172311641
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; (, AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research)
    null (Ed.)
    The growing prevalence of data-rich networked information technologies—such as social media platforms, smartphones, wearable devices, and the internet of things —brings an increase in the flow of rich, deep, and often identifiable personal information available for researchers. More than just “big data,” these datasets reflect people’s lives and activities, bridge multiple dimensions of a person’s life, and are often collected, aggregated, exchanged, and mined without them knowing. We call this data “pervasive data,” and the increased scale, scope, speed, and depth of pervasive data available to researchers require that we confront the ethical frameworks that guide such research activities. Multiple stakeholders are embroiled in the challenges of research ethics in pervasive data research: researchers struggle with questions of privacy and consent, user communities may not even be aware of the widespread harvesting of their data for scientific study, platforms are increasingly restricting researcher’s access to data over fears of privacy and security, and ethical review boards face increasing difficulties in properly considering the complexities of research protocols relying on user data collected online. The results presented in this paper expand our understanding of how ethical review board members think about pervasive data research. It provides insights into how IRB professionals make decisions about the use of pervasive data in cases not obviously covered by traditional research ethics guidelines, and points to challenges for IRBs when reviewing research protocols relying on pervasive data. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; (, Social Media + Society)
    null (Ed.)
    Research using online datasets from social media platforms continues to grow in prominence, but recent research suggests that platform users are sometimes uncomfortable with the ways their posts and content are used in research studies. While previous research has suggested that a variety of contextual variables may influence this discomfort, such factors have yet to be isolated and compared. In this article, we present results from a factorial vignette survey of American Facebook users. Findings reveal that researcher domain, content type, purpose of data use, and awareness of data collection all impact respondents’ comfort—measured via judgments of acceptability and concern—with diverse data uses. We provide guidance to researchers and ethics review boards about the ways that user reactions to research uses of their data can serve as a cue for identifying sensitive data types and uses. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; (, Journal of Medical Internet Research)
    Background Social networks such as Twitter offer the clinical research community a novel opportunity for engaging potential study participants based on user activity data. However, the availability of public social media data has led to new ethical challenges about respecting user privacy and the appropriateness of monitoring social media for clinical trial recruitment. Researchers have voiced the need for involving users’ perspectives in the development of ethical norms and regulations. Objective This study examined the attitudes and level of concern among Twitter users and nonusers about using Twitter for monitoring social media users and their conversations to recruit potential clinical trial participants. Methods We used two online methods for recruiting study participants: the open survey was (1) advertised on Twitter between May 23 and June 8, 2017, and (2) deployed on TurkPrime, a crowdsourcing data acquisition platform, between May 23 and June 8, 2017. Eligible participants were adults, 18 years of age or older, who lived in the United States. People with and without Twitter accounts were included in the study. Results While nearly half the respondents—on Twitter (94/603, 15.6%) and on TurkPrime (509/603, 84.4%)—indicated agreement that social media monitoring constitutes a form of eavesdropping that invades their privacy, over one-third disagreed and nearly 1 in 5 had no opinion. A chi-square test revealed a positive relationship between respondents’ general privacy concern and their average concern about Internet research (P<.005). We found associations between respondents’ Twitter literacy and their concerns about the ability for researchers to monitor their Twitter activity for clinical trial recruitment (P=.001) and whether they consider Twitter monitoring for clinical trial recruitment as eavesdropping (P<.001) and an invasion of privacy (P=.003). As Twitter literacy increased, so did people’s concerns about researchers monitoring Twitter activity. Our data support the previously suggested use of the nonexceptionalist methodology for assessing social media in research, insofar as social media-based recruitment does not need to be considered exceptional and, for most, it is considered preferable to traditional in-person interventions at physical clinics. The expressed attitudes were highly contextual, depending on factors such as the type of disease or health topic (eg, HIV/AIDS vs obesity vs smoking), the entity or person monitoring users on Twitter, and the monitored information. Conclusions The data and findings from this study contribute to the critical dialogue with the public about the use of social media in clinical research. The findings suggest that most users do not think that monitoring Twitter for clinical trial recruitment constitutes inappropriate surveillance or a violation of privacy. However, researchers should remain mindful that some participants might find social media monitoring problematic when connected with certain conditions or health topics. Further research should isolate factors that influence the level of concern among social media users across platforms and populations and inform the development of more clear and consistent guidelines. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; (, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media)
    Social media has been at the center of discussions about political polarization in the United States. However, scholars are actively debating both the scale of political polarization online, and how important online polarization is to the offline world. One question at the center of this debate is what interactions across parties look like online, and in particular 1) whether increasing the number of such interactions is likely to increase or reduce polarization, and 2) what technological affordances may make it more likely that these cross-party interactions benefit, rather than detract from, existing political challenges. The present work aims to provide insights into the latter; that is, we focus on providing a better understanding of how a set of 400,000 partisan users on a particular social media platform, Twitter, used the platform's affordances to interact within and across parties in a large dataset of tweets about COVID in 2021. Our findings suggest that Republican use of cross-party interaction were both more potent and potentially more strategic during COVID, that cross-party interaction was driven heavily by a small set of users and conversations, and that there exist non-obvious indirect pathways to cross-party exposure when different modes of interaction are chained together (especially retweets of quotes). These findings have implications beyond Twitter, we believe, in understanding how affordances of platforms can help to shape partisan exposure and interaction. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, ACM Journal on Computing and Sustainable Societies)
    Social media platform affordances allow users to interact with content and with each other in diverse ways. For example, on Twitter,1users can like, reply, retweet, or quote another tweet. Though it’s clear that these different features allow various types of interactions, open questions remain about how these different affordances shape the conversations. We examine how two similar, but distinct conversational features on Twitter — specifically reply vs. quote — are used differently. Focusing on the polarized discourse around Robert Mueller’s congressional testimony in July 2019, we look at how these features are employed in conversations between politically aligned and opposed accounts. We use a mixed methods approach, employing grounded qualitative analysis to identify the different conversational and framing strategies salient in that discourse and then quantitatively analyzing how those techniques differed across the different features and political alignments. Our research (1) demonstrates that the quote feature is more often used to broadcast and reply is more often used to reframe the conversation; (2) identifies the different framing strategies that emerge through the use of these features when engaging with politically aligned vs. opposed accounts; (3) discusses how reply and quote features may be re-designed to reduce the adversarial tone of polarized conversations on Twitter-like platforms. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email