Literatursammlung | FeKoM -Forschungsethik in der Kommunikations- und Medienwissenschaft

Forschungsergebnisse

Wenn Sie die einzelnen Literatureinträge auswählen, bekommen Sie eine Zusammenfassung und weitere Informationen.

Aryani, A. (2015). Data Description Registry Interoperability WG: Interlinking Method and Specification of Cross-Platform Discovery. https://doi.org/10.15497/RDA00003

Braun, R., Ravn, T., & Frankus, E. (2020). What constitutes expertise in research ethics and integrity? Research Ethics, 16(1–2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016119898402

Brey, P., Shelley-Egan, C., Rodrigues, R., & Jansen, P. (2017). The Ethical Assessment of Research and Innovation – A Reflection on the State of the Art (Based on Findings of the SATORI Project). In R. Iphofen (Ed.), Finding Common Ground: Consensus in Research Ethics Across the Social Sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 185–198). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2398-601820170000001015

Curran, D., Kekewich, M., & Foreman, T. (2019). Examining the use of consent forms to promote dissemination of research results to participants. Research Ethics, 15(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016118798877

Custers, B., Van der Hof, S., & Schermer, B. (2014). Privacy Expectations of Social Media Users: The Role of Informed Consent in Privacy Policies: Privacy Expectations of Social Media Users. Policy & Internet, 6(3), 268–295. https://doi.org/10.1002/1944-2866.POI366

Favaretto, M., De Clercq, E., Briel, M., & Elger, B. S. (2020). Working Through Ethics Review of Big Data Research Projects: An Investigation into the Experiences of Swiss and American Researchers. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 15(4), 339–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264620935223

Flicker, S., Travers, R., Guta, A., McDonald, S., & Meagher, A. (2007). Ethical Dilemmas in Community-Based Participatory Research: Recommendations for Institutional Review Boards. Journal of Urban Health : Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 84, 478–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-007-9165-7

Frieters-Reermann, N., Klomann, V., Genenger-Stricker, M., & Sylla, N. (2021). „Wir sind nicht dein nächstes Forschungsprojekt!“ – Kritische Reflexionen zu Ethik, Methodik und Machtverhältnissen in Forschungsprozessen im Kontext von Bildung und Migration. In J. Franz & U. Unterkofler (Eds.), Forschungsethik in der Sozialen Arbeit: Prinzipien und Erfahrungen (pp. 255–267). Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1kr4n3n.16

Geier, C., Adams, R. B., Mitchell, K. M., & Holtz, B. E. (2021). Informed Consent for Online Research—Is Anybody Reading?: Assessing Comprehension and Individual Differences in Readings of Digital Consent Forms. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 15562646211020160. https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646211020160

Giaxoglou, K. (2017). Reflections on internet research ethics from language-focused research on web-based mourning: revisiting the private/public distinction as a language ideology of differentiation. Applied Linguistics Review, 8(2/3), 229–250. Communication & Mass Media Complete. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2016-1037

Gilbert, S., Vitak, J., & Shilton, K. (2021). Measuring Americans’ Comfort With Research Uses of Their Social Media Data. Social Media + Society, 7(3), 20563051211033824. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211033824

Hausstein, B. (2019). Zitierbarmachung und Zitation von Forschungsdaten. In U. Jensen, S. Netscher, & K. Weller (Eds.), Forschungsdatenmanagement sozialwissenschaftlicher Umfragedaten (pp. 179–192). Verlag Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.3224/84742233

Jensen, U., Zenk-Möltgen, W., & Wasner, C. (2019). Metadatenstandards im Kontext sozialwissenschaftlicher Daten. In U. Jensen, S. Netscher, & K. Weller (Eds.), Forschungsdatenmanagement sozialwissenschaftlicher Umfragedaten (pp. 151–178). Verlag Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.3224/84742233

John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling. Psychological Science, 23(5), 524–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611430953

Koch, T., & Geiß, S. (2019). Wie zuverlässig ist das Peer-Review-Verfahren? Eine Untersuchung der Interrater-Reliabilität von Gutachter*innen auf DGPuK-Tagungen. Studies in Communication and Media, 8, 203–235. https://doi.org/10.5771/2192-4007-2019-2-203

MacNeil, S. D., & Fernandez, C. V. (2006). Offering results to research participants. BMJ, 332(7535), 188–189. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.332.7535.188

MacNeill, K., Bolt, B., Barrett, E., McPherson, M., Sierra, M., Miller, S., Ednie-Brown, P., & Wilson, C. (2021). An ethical engagement: creative practice research, the academy and professional codes of conduct. Research Ethics, 17(1), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120915950

Mamotte, N., & Wassenaar, D. (2009). Ethics Review in a Developing Country: A Survey of South African Social Scientists’ Experiences. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 4(4), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1525/jer.2009.4.4.69

Matthes, J., Marquart, F., Naderer, B., Arendt, F., Schmuck, D., & Adam, K. (2015). Questionable Research Practices in Experimental Communication Research: A Systematic Analysis From 1980 to 2013. Communication Methods and Measures, 9(4), 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2015.1096334

Norval, C., & Henderson, T. (2020). Automating Dynamic Consent Decisions for the Processing of Social Media Data in Health Research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 15(3), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264619883715

Perrault, E. K., & Keating, D. M. (2018). Seeking Ways to Inform the Uninformed: Improving the Informed Consent Process in Online Social Science Research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 13(1), 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264617738846

Stommel, W., & Rijk, L. de. (2021). Ethical approval: none sought. How discourse analysts report ethical issues around publicly available online data. Research Ethics, 17(3), 275–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120988767