ArticleJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE
Linking Survey and Twitter Data: Informed Consent, Disclosure, Security, and Archiving.
Article in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measurement Method Options to Investigate Digital Screen Technology Use by Children and Adolescents: A Narrative Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Epicosm-a framework for linking online social media in epidemiological cohorts.International journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Ethical Considerations for Augmenting Surveys with Auxiliary Data Sources.Public opinion quarterly · 2023Review
- Comparative sensitivity of social media data and their acceptable use in research.Scientific data · 2022Article
- Sharing social media data: The role of past experiences, attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control.Frontiers in big data · 2022Article
- Combining Survey and Social Media Data: Respondents' Opinions on COVID-19 Measures and Their Willingness to Provide Their Social Media Account Information.Frontiers in sociology · 2022Article
- Who polarizes Twitter? Ideological polarization, partisan groups and strategic networked campaigning on Twitter during the 2017 and 2021 German Federal elections 'Bundestagswahlen'.Social network analysis and mining · 2022Article
- Views on social media and its linkage to longitudinal data from two generations of a UK cohort study.Wellcome open research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Linked survey and Twitter data present an unprecedented opportunity for social scientific analysis, but the ethical implications for such work are complex-requiring a deeper understanding of the nature and composition of Twitter data to fully appreciate the risks of disclosure and harm to participants. In this article, we draw on our experience of three recent linked data studies, briefly discussing the background research on data linkage and the complications around ensuring informed consent. Particular attention is paid to the vast array of data available from Twitter and in what manner it might be disclosive. In light of this, the issues of maintaining security, minimizing risk, archiving, and reuse are applied to linked Twitter and survey data. In conclusion, we reflect on how our ability to collect and work with Twitter data has outpaced our technical understandings of how the data are constituted and observe that understanding one's data is an essential prerequisite for ensuring best ethical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.