Computational Social Science and Ethical Decisions (Scienze Sociali Computazionali e Decisioni Etiche)

Vanessa Russo


The development of the web, in the last 20 years, has opened new areas of analysis and new phenomena sociologically relevant for social research. However, the research work in digital space presents a series of ethical and deontological problems. In this context the members of the Association of Internet Researchers (AOIR) have composed and edited a document with a series of ethical guidelines for social research. The work of the AOIR group not include Italian researchers; for this reason, the aim of this paper is propose a commented translation of the contents of Ethical decision-making and Internet research for make the ethical factor one of the main tools for computational sociology.


computational social science; digital ethnography; internet studies; web 3.0

Full Text:



AOIR (2012). Ethical decision-making and Internet research 2.0: Recommendations from the AoIR ethics working committee. Il testo integrale è reperibile al sito:

Ayers, M. (2003). Fact or fiction: Notes of a man interviewing women online. In Buchanan, E.A. (Ed.). Readings in Virtual Research Ethics: Issues and Controversies (pp. 262-273). Hershey: Idea Group.

Baker, A. (2009). Small Talk. International Journal of Internet Research Ethics 2, 1, 1-5.

Bassett, E. H., & O’Riordan, K. (2002). Ethics of internet research: Contesting the human subjects research model. Ethics and Information Technology, 4 (3), 233-249. Reperibile al sito:

Bromseth, J. C. H. (2002). Public places – public activities? Methodological approaches and ethical dilemmas in research on computer-mediated communication contexts. In A. Morrison (Ed.), Researching ICTs in Context (pp. 33-61). Inter/Media Report 3/2002. Oslo: University of Oslo.

Boyd, d., & Marwick, A. (2011). How Teens Understand Privacy. Unpublished Manuscript. disponibile al sito:

Buchanan, E., & Ess. C. (2009). Internet research ethics and the Institutional Review Board: Current practices and issues. Computers and Society, 39 (3) 43-49.

Buchanan, E., Markham, A., & Ess. C. (2010). Ethics and internet research commons: Building a sustainable future. Association of Internet Researchers 11th Annual Conference Workshop. Gottenburg, Sweden.

Chee, F. M., Taylor, N. T., & de Castell, S. (2012). Re-mediating research ethics: End-user license agreements in online games. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 32(6), 497-506.

Ess, C. (2009). Digital Media Ethics. Cambridge: Polity.

Gajjala, R. (2004). Cyber Selves: Feminist Ethnographies of South Asian Women. Walnut Creek: Altamire Press.

Hudson, J. M., & Bruckman, A. (2004). Go away: Participant objections to being studied and the ethics of chatroom research. Information Society, 20(2), 127-139.

Ikonomidis Svedmark, E. (2010). Med nätet som fält: urvalstankar, känslostormar och etikproblem. Kulturella Perspektiv 2, 11-21.

Ikonomidis Svedmark, E., & Nyberg, A. (2009). Om det privata i publika och digitala rum. In Se mig: Unga om sex och internet (pp. 354-383). Stockholm: Davidsons Tryckeri AB.

Karpf, D. (2012). Social science research methods in internet time. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 639-661.

Kraut, R., Olson, J., Banaji, M., Bruckman, A., Cohen, J., & Cooper, M. (2004). Psychological research online: Report of board of scientific affairs' advisory group on the conduct of research on the internet. American Psychologist, 59(4), 1-13.

Markham, A. (2012). Fabrication as ethical practice: Qualitative inquiry in ambiguous internet contexts. Information, Communication, and Society, 5(3), 334-353.

Markham, A. (2009). How can qualitative researchers produce work that is meaningful across time, space, and culture? In Markham, A. N., & Baym, N. K. (Eds.). Internet inquiry: Conversations about method (pp. 131-155). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

McKee, H. A., & Porter, J. E. (2009). The Ethics of Internet Research: A Rhetorical, Case-based Process. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Narayanan, A., & Shmatikov, V. (2009). De-anonymizing social networks. IEEE Symposium on Security & Privacy. Oakland, CA. Available:

Narayanan, A., & Shmatikov, V. (2008). Robust de-anonymization of large sparse datasets (How to break anonymity of the Netflix prize dataset.) IEEE Symposium on Security & Privacy. Oakland, CA. Available:

National Science Foundation. (2008). Interpreting the Common Rule for the Protection of Human Subjects for Behavioral and Social Science Research. Available:

Nissenbaum, H. (2010). Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Russo, V. (2017). Città e culture nello spazio digitale. e-Methods applicati allo studio del mediattivismo civico, Milano, Franco Angeli

Stern, S. (2003). Encountering distressing information in online research: A consideration of legal and ethical responsibilities. New Media and Society 5, 249-266.

Sveningsson, M. (2003). Ethics in internet ethnography. In Buchanan, E. (Ed.). Readings in Virtual Research Ethics: Issues and Controversies (pp. 45-61). Hershey: Idea Group.

Sveningsson-Elm, M. (2009). How do various notions of privacy influence decision making in qualitative internet research. In Markham, A. & Baym, N. (Eds.) internet Inquiry: Conversation about method (pp. 69-87). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sweeney, L. (2003). Navigating computer science research through waves of privacy concerns: Discussions among computer scientists at Carnegie Mellon University. In Tech Report, CMU CS 03-165, CMU-ISRI-03-102. Pittsburgh.

Zimmer, M. (2010). But the data is already public: On the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics & Information Technology, 12(4), 313-325.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2017 Vanessa Russo

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Science & Philosophy - Journal of Epistemology, Science and Philosophy. ISSN 2282-7757; eISSN  2282-7765.