Ethics and Information Technology

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 217–231 | Cite as

Studying the amateur artist: A perspective on disguising data collected in human subjects research on the Internet

  • Amy Bruckman


In the mid-1990s, the Internet rapidly changedfrom a venue used by a small number ofscientists to a popular phenomena affecting allaspects of life in industrialized nations. Scholars from diverse disciplines have taken aninterest in trying to understand the Internetand Internet users. However, as a variety ofresearchers have noted, guidelines for ethicalresearch on human subjects written before theInternet's growth can be difficult to extend toresearch on Internet users.In this paper, I focus on one ethicalissue: whether and to what extent to disguisematerial collected online in publishedaccounts. While some people argue thatvulnerable human subjects must always be madeanonymous in publications for their ownprotection, others argue that Internet usersdeserve credit for their creative andintellectual work. Still others argue thatmuch material available online should betreated as ``published.'' To attempt to resolvethese issues, I first review my own experiencesof disguising material in research accountsfrom 1992 to 2002. Some of the thorniestissues emerge at the boundaries betweenresearch disciplines. Furthermore, manyhumanities disciplines have not historicallyviewed what they do as human subjects research. Next, I explore what it means to do humansubjects research in the humanities. Inspiredby issues raised by colleagues in thehumanities, I argue that the traditional notionof a ``human subject'' does not adequatelycharacterize Internet users. A useful alternatemental model is proposed: Internet users areamateur artists. The Internet can be seen as aplayground for amateur artists creatingsemi-published work. I argue that thisapproach helps make some ethical dilemmaseasier to reason about, because it highlightskey novel aspects of the situation,particularly with regard to disguisingmaterial. Finally, I conclude by proposing aset of practical guidelines regardingdisguising material gathered on the Internet inpublished accounts, on a continuum from nodisguise, light disguise, moderate disguise, toheavy disguise.

human subjects research identity Internet pseudonyms research ethics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. R. Barthes. Death of the Author. Image Music Text, pp. 142–148. Hill and Wang, New York, 1977.Google Scholar
  2. J. Berman and A. Bruckman. The Turing Game: Exploring Identity in an Online Environment. Convergence, 7(3): 83–102, 2001.Google Scholar
  3. A. Bruckman. Identity Workshop: Social and Psychological Phenomena in Text-Based Virtual Reality. Unpublished manuscript, 1992 (available at∼asb/papers/identity-workshop.{ps,rtf}).Google Scholar
  4. A. Bruckman. Cyberspace is Not Disneyland: The Role of the Artist in a Networked World. Commissioned by the Getty Art History Information Program, 1995 (available at∼asb/papers/getty/disneyland.html). Code of Federal Regulations Title 45, Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, Office for Protection from Research Risks, Part 46, Protection of Human Subjects, November 13, 2001 (available at Scholar
  5. J. Dibbell. A Rape in Cyberspace. The Village Voice, December 21st, 1993, pp. 36–42.Google Scholar
  6. J. Dibbell. My Tiny Life: Crime and Passion in a Virtual World. Henry Holt and Company, New York, 1998.Google Scholar
  7. G. Eysenback and J.E. Till. Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research on Internet Communities. BMJ, 323: 1103–1105, 2001.Google Scholar
  8. Mark S. Frankel and Sanyin Siang. Ethical and Legal Aspects of Human Subjects Research on the Internet: A Report of a Workshop June 10-11, 1999. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), November, 1999 (available at Scholar
  9. D. Hebdige. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. Routledge, London, 1979.Google Scholar
  10. S. Herring. Linguistic and Critical Analysis of Computer-Mediated Communication: Some Ethical and Scholarly Considerations. The Information Society, 12: 153–168, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. J.M. Hudson and A. Bruckman. IRC Français: The Creation of an Internet-Based SLA Community. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(2): 109–134, 2002.Google Scholar
  12. D.G. Johnson. Computer Ethics, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, JN, 2001.Google Scholar
  13. S. King. Researching Internet Communities: Proposed Ethical Guidelines for the Reporting of Results. The Information Society, 12: 119-127, 1996.Google Scholar
  14. J. Litman. Digital Copyright. Prometheus Books, Amherst, NY, 2001.Google Scholar
  15. W. Mitchell (personal communication, April 2001).Google Scholar
  16. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research, 1979 (available at Scholar
  17. R. Oldenburg. The Great Good Place. Paragon House, New York, 1989.Google Scholar
  18. S. Papert. Situating Constructionism. In I. Harel and S. Papert, editors, Constructionism, pp. 1–12. Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ, 1991.Google Scholar
  19. A. Pritchard. Searching for ‘Research Involving Human Subjects’. IRB: Ethics and Human Research, 23(3): 5–12, 2001.Google Scholar
  20. J. Radway. Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 1984.Google Scholar
  21. E. Reid. Informed Consent in the Study of On-Line Communities: A Reflection on the Effects of Computer-Mediated Social Research. The Information Society, 12: 169–174, 1996.Google Scholar
  22. Seidman. Interviewing as Qualitative Research, 2nd edn. Teachers College Press, New York, 1998.Google Scholar
  23. SPJ Code of Ethics. Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), 1996 (zavailable ast Scholar
  24. S. Turkle. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. Simon & Schuster, New York, 1995.Google Scholar
  25. D. Waskul and M. Douglass. Considering the Electronic Participant: Some Polemical Observations on the Ethics of On-Line Research. The Information Society, 12: 129–139, 1996.Google Scholar
  26. W.K. Wimsatt and M.C. Beardsley. The Intentional Fallacy. The Verbal Icon, pp. 3–18. University of Kentucky Press, Lexington, KY, 1954.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amy Bruckman
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Computing/GVU CenterGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlanta

Personalised recommendations