> I do work in Social Computing, and this situation is directly analogous to a number of incidents on Wikipedia quite awhile ago that led to that community and researchers reaching an understanding on research methods that are and are not acceptable.
> Yes! This was an IRB 'failure'. Again, in my area of Social Computing, it's been clear for awhile that IRBs often do not understand the issues and the potential risks/harms of doing research in online communities / social media.
An interesting question is IMHO who people actually tried to contact in the first round of this getting publicity (and I guess how many did so at all), and if leadership should thus have been aware earlier that there was controversy worth looking into.
> I do work in Social Computing, and this situation is directly analogous to a number of incidents on Wikipedia quite awhile ago that led to that community and researchers reaching an understanding on research methods that are and are not acceptable.
and https://twitter.com/lorenterveen/status/1384966202301337603
> Yes! This was an IRB 'failure'. Again, in my area of Social Computing, it's been clear for awhile that IRBs often do not understand the issues and the potential risks/harms of doing research in online communities / social media.
An interesting question is IMHO who people actually tried to contact in the first round of this getting publicity (and I guess how many did so at all), and if leadership should thus have been aware earlier that there was controversy worth looking into.