Three key values for ethical cyberspace research practices are evident in recent discussions: (1) protect the subjects from harm as a result of the research fieldwork and the research practices; (2) produce good social science research; and (3) do not unnecessarily perturb the phenomena studied. Much of the argumentation aims to negotiate the ethical conflicts that often emerge between these goals. Bakhtin argues that one can only strive for a bottom-up ethical wisdom built upon concrete examples, and disputes the possibility that rigid top-down application of universal rules constitutes ethical action. His perspective has key implications for ethical research practices. I illustrate this perspective at work through my recent fieldwork and writing practices in a virtual community. Research ethics for cyberspace are like research ethics for any other site. They should be situated, dialogic agreements that develop over time between researchers and the participants of the research study. It is unlikely that ...
[1]
Michael Holquist,et al.
Art and Answerability: Early Philosophical Essays
,
1990
.
[2]
Michael Holquist,et al.
Toward a Philosophy of the Act
,
1995
.
[3]
G BATESON,et al.
Minimal requirements for a theory of schizophrenia.
,
1960,
A.M.A. archives of general psychiatry.
[4]
A. V. Gennep.
The rites of passage
,
1960
.
[5]
D. Hindman.
The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier
,
1996
.
[6]
V. Turner.
Dramas, Fields, and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society
,
1975
.
[7]
Julian Dibbell.
A Rape in Cyberspace: Or How an Evil Clown
,
2012
.
[8]
Caryl Emerson,et al.
Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics
,
1992
.
[9]
S. C. Kersenboom,et al.
The anthropology of performance
,
1986
.
[10]
M. Bakhtin,et al.
The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays
,
1981
.