 While ethical concerns surged from experiments like this, think Neuro-emotions while you read the article.
In January 11–18, 2012 an experiment involving emotional response was conducted by a global behemoth. Facebook, one of the largest social websites, implement a series of News Feed manipulation where the user would only see either positive or negative post. The purpose of the controlled experiment was to collect data upon a responsive reaction to the triggered post. Two variables, Positive and Negative, were the center of the experiment that once the data was collected it would support the claims of emotional contagion. Data was collected during a week were roughly ∼155,000 users participated without their knowledge. The ethical question arises after Facebook was questioned if the participants were asked for consent and the answer was avoided by a general statement were Facebook claims that users acknowledge any Facebook’s policies by signing in into their accounts. Users naturally responded to the controlled experiment that lately was published as an experiment under the spectrum of psychological and cognitive sciences. The Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks document provides significant information that could be used for scientific purposes, however in the ambit of ethical measures, collecting data without the knowledge of the users is an advantageous move in the world of data mining. The nature of such experiment rest upon an unethical equilibrium where no consent is retrieved from the participants. As a student of science, I am aware that the main key for a successful experiment is concentrated in the details of the matter. That means, that knowing age, gender and other characteristics of the user was essentially important to penetrate cognitive boundaries. It is utterly unethical this violation of freedom in cognitive response. No consent was given and the resulting data was analyzed. As Frank Buytendijk portrays in Power, reach of analytics pose new ethical dilemmas the ultimate use of the collected data contradicts the ethical schemas of a free world. In this case, data is collected from a distinctive angle; however, it could be utilized strategically for Facebook’s gain. Buytendijk mentions in his article, “Analytics today are interactive and iterative. Analyzing data is… it’s explorative in nature.” And the nature of social network as Facebook is to find the profitable dispositions of his company. This approach, as mentioned, differs from many others that involved numbers and statistics. Nevertheless, this case goes beyond the factual evidence and extracts cognitive measures that can be used as any other type of data. In comparison to some other collection of data, such data obtained through Facebook’s users can be quantified to the benefit of the market and other profitable purposes. In the elite of the unknown is known that such practices are demographically and racially implemented by the total identity of the user. Sources http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/06/everything-we-know-about-facebooks-secret-mood-manipulation-experiment/373648/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/07/01/was-the-facebook-emotion-experiment-unethical/?utm_term=.2f4a63e11547 http://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full.pdf
1 Comment
|
RSS Feed