Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41934643›Full record

ReviewJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE2026

Ethical Frameworks for Conducting Social Challenge Studies.

Protiva Sen, Laurent Hébert-Dufresne, Pablo Bose, Juniper Lovato

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Protiva SenDepartment of Computer Science, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-5292-5720
Laurent Hébert-DufresneDepartment of Computer Science, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0008-3673
Pablo BoseDepartment of Geography and Geosciences, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8727-8667
Juniper LovatoDepartment of Computer Science, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1619-7552

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computational social science research, particularly online studies, often involves exposing participants to the adverse phenomenon the researchers aim to study. Examples include presenting conspiracy theories in surveys, exposing systems to hackers, or deploying bots on social media. We refer to these as "social challenge studies," by analogy with medical research, where challenge studies advance vaccine and drug testing but also raise ethical concerns about exposing healthy individuals to risk. Medical challenge studies are guided by established ethical frameworks that regulate how participants are exposed to agents under controlled conditions. In contrast, social challenge studies typically occur with less control and fewer clearly defined ethical guidelines. In this paper, we examine the ethical frameworks developed for medical challenge studies and consider how their principles might inform social research. Our aim is to initiate discussion on formalizing ethical standards for social challenge studies and encourage long-term evaluation of potential harms.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchEthics, ResearchResearch DesignSocial SciencesDigital MediaHuman Challenge Trials as TopicHumansSocial Mediachallenge studiescomputational social scienceonline researchresearch conductresearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID41934643
PMCPMC13250264

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.