Ethical issues with using Internet of Things devices in citizen science research: A scoping review

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2007.09416v2
• Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 13:48:26 GMT
• Title: Ethical issues with using Internet of Things devices in citizen science research: A scoping review
• Authors: James Scheibner, Anna Jobin, Effy Vayena
• Abstract summary: This chapter presents a scoping review of published scientific studies that utilise both citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices. We selected studies where the authors had included at least a short discussion of the ethical issues encountered during the research process. Following this analysis, our discussion provides recommendations for researchers who wish to integrate citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices into their research.
• Score: 1.933681537640272
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Our chapter presents a scoping review of published scientific studies or case studies of scientific studies that utilise both citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices. Specifically, we selected studies where the authors had included at least a short discussion of the ethical issues encountered during the research process. Having conducted a search of five databases (IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and PubMed), we identified 631 potential results. Following abstract and title screening, and then full text eligibility assessment, we identified 34 published articles that matched our criteria. We then analysed the full text for these articles inductively and deductively, coding ethical issues into three main categories. These categories were autonomy and data privacy, data quality, and intellectual property. We also analysed the full text of these articles to see what strategies researchers took to resolve these ethical issues, as well as any legal implications raised. Following this analysis, our discussion provides recommendations for researchers who wish to integrate citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices into their research. First, all citizen science projects should integrate a data privacy protocol to protect the confidentiality of participants. Secondly, scientific researchers should consider any potential issues of data quality, including whether compromises might be required, before establishing a project. Finally, all intellectual property issues should be clarified both at the start of the project and during its lifecycle. Researchers should also consider any ethical issues that might flow from the use of commercially available Internet of Things devices for research.

Related papers

• Web Scraping for Research: Legal, Ethical, Institutional, and Scientific Considerations [11.851771490297693]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive framework for web scraping in social science research for U.S.-based researchers. We present an overview of the current regulatory environment impacting when and how researchers can access, collect, store, and share data via scraping. We then provide researchers with recommendations to conduct scraping in a scientifically legitimate and ethical manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T20:20:44Z)
• What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review? [173.8912784451817]
  In modern science, peer review is widely used, yet it is hard, time-consuming, and prone to error. Since the artifacts involved in peer review are largely text-based, Natural Language Processing has great potential to improve reviewing. We detail each step of the process from manuscript submission to camera-ready revision, and discuss the associated challenges and opportunities for NLP assistance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T16:06:43Z)
• A Survey of Privacy-Preserving Model Explanations: Privacy Risks, Attacks, and Countermeasures [50.987594546912725]
  Despite a growing corpus of research in AI privacy and explainability, there is little attention on privacy-preserving model explanations. This article presents the first thorough survey about privacy attacks on model explanations and their countermeasures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-31T12:44:48Z)
• Ethical Implications of ChatGPT in Higher Education: A Scoping Review [11.567239416304714]
  This scoping review explores the ethical challenges of using ChatGPT in higher education. By reviewing recent academic articles in English, Chinese, and Japanese, we aimed to provide a deep dive review and identify gaps in the literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-24T09:52:49Z)
• Responsible AI Considerations in Text Summarization Research: A Review of Current Practices [89.85174013619883]
  We focus on text summarization, a common NLP task largely overlooked by the responsible AI community. We conduct a multi-round qualitative analysis of 333 summarization papers from the ACL Anthology published between 2020-2022. We focus on how, which, and when responsible AI issues are covered, which relevant stakeholders are considered, and mismatches between stated and realized research goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T15:35:36Z)
• The ethical ambiguity of AI data enrichment: Measuring gaps in research ethics norms and practices [2.28438857884398]
  This study explores how, and to what extent, comparable research ethics requirements and norms have developed for AI research and data enrichment. Leading AI venues have begun to establish protocols for human data collection, but these are are inconsistently followed by authors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-01T16:12:55Z)
• Science in the Era of ChatGPT, Large Language Models and Generative AI: Challenges for Research Ethics and How to Respond [3.3504365823045044]
  This paper reviews challenges, ethical and integrity risks in science conduct in the advent of generative AI. The role of AI language models as a research instrument and subject is scrutinized along with ethical implications for scientists, participants and reviewers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T16:23:46Z)
• The Semantic Reader Project: Augmenting Scholarly Documents through AI-Powered Interactive Reading Interfaces [54.2590226904332]
  We describe the Semantic Reader Project, a effort across multiple institutions to explore automatic creation of dynamic reading interfaces for research papers. Ten prototype interfaces have been developed and more than 300 participants and real-world users have shown improved reading experiences. We structure this paper around challenges scholars and the public face when reading research papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-25T02:47:09Z)
• How Data Scientists Review the Scholarly Literature [4.406926847270567]
  We examine the literature review practices of data scientists. Data science represents a field seeing an exponential rise in papers. No prior work has examined the specific practices and challenges faced by these scientists.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-10T03:53:05Z)
• Artificial Intelligence in Concrete Materials: A Scientometric View [77.34726150561087]
  This chapter aims to uncover the main research interests and knowledge structure of the existing literature on AI for concrete materials. To begin with, a total of 389 journal articles published from 1990 to 2020 were retrieved from the Web of Science. Scientometric tools such as keyword co-occurrence analysis and documentation co-citation analysis were adopted to quantify features and characteristics of the research field.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-17T18:24:56Z)
• Can We Automate Scientific Reviewing? [89.50052670307434]
  We discuss the possibility of using state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) models to generate first-pass peer reviews for scientific papers. We collect a dataset of papers in the machine learning domain, annotate them with different aspects of content covered in each review, and train targeted summarization models that take in papers to generate reviews. Comprehensive experimental results show that system-generated reviews tend to touch upon more aspects of the paper than human-written reviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-30T07:16:53Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.