Ethics in Singapore
Privacy vs openness w/ species protection
--as strict scientist, would not obscure any data, and say poachers would find it anyway, and get
information to authorities too
-stalking via geo-locations of data submissions
-scraping information from social media w/ and w/out photo -- do you need permission?
--people have copyright on photos so need permission
--some are professional photographers
--people want their information used responsibly and for practical purpose (like conservation measures)
Intellectual property
ownership of crowdsourced data
Attribution --
-->acknowledgements
-->watch movie and see lots of credits, why not on papers
--> some faculty get full credit for 1st and last authorship, 1/2 credit for
second authorship, etc.
proprietary feelings among many people
-opportunity for people to have access to all of science
-access to STEM pipeline?
-need information -- perhaps that is new type of informed consent
ethical
--> what if project is for education only? simulating past experiments? (like Transit of Venus)
ownership issues ---
gate-keeper --> like eBird having to fill out data request form
don't know how they are using it for sure
activity tracker data - quantified self
Report-back? - make them meaningful to volunteers, based on their level of understanding
-what about data that no one can make sense of?
--if you extract narrative out of data, then you are censoring in some way
--some say scientists does not have obligation to disclose everything
--can bury a real problem by giving people too much info
--if you see volunteers as collaborators, then you'd share more, and if you see as crowdsourcers, then wouldnt share as much
Intent -- people participate for reasons and those inform ethical obligations
Deception? like play with your dog project
when start human subjects research, lay out informed consent,
so why not do that with citizen science projects ---- manage
expectation with regard to all aspects of project and let
them agree to terms and conditions. don't want bait and switch.
-some cultures are more into procedures (like Brits)
-how data will be kept, who has access, etc. put rules of game ahead of time
--ethical treatment of animals under study, e.g., tons of flashes of cameras of frogs
token or edu - bioblitz iNat?
open hardware --- is that real access? difficult, no customer support
--really for non-proprietary systems
--open software used to be difficult too.
amateur scientists
-"independent research" is term in social sciences
used to be in 1930s and after that radio hams were in front of technology and helped build early
communication satelittles -- everyone built their own equipment (in 1950s)
trajectory of technology and adoption -- e.g., manned flight. 1903 to end of WWII to get travelling flight shows (barm storming)
-->after war, army sold aircraft and tech trickled down quickly
e.g., space flight -- rocket tech was amateur affair, even liquid fluid rocket was first in backyard,
and then after war was cold war technology and then only in hands of states, and
people criticize NASA as part of that establishment as reason space flight has
not advanced as much as it could have
-institutional safeguards can limit innovation spread, but that can be important
-when tech has potential to harm, put regulations on it
lawyer, doctor, soldier, priest -- 4 original professions
what is role of scientists? most are driven by ego, want nobel prize
-- or add to public good, increase body of knowledge
Privacy vs openness w/ species protection
--as strict scientist, would not obscure any data, and say poachers would find it anyway, and get
information to authorities too
-stalking via geo-locations of data submissions
-scraping information from social media w/ and w/out photo -- do you need permission?
--people have copyright on photos so need permission
--some are professional photographers
--people want their information used responsibly and for practical purpose (like conservation measures)
Intellectual property
ownership of crowdsourced data
Attribution --
-->acknowledgements
-->watch movie and see lots of credits, why not on papers
--> some faculty get full credit for 1st and last authorship, 1/2 credit for
second authorship, etc.
proprietary feelings among many people
-opportunity for people to have access to all of science
-access to STEM pipeline?
-need information -- perhaps that is new type of informed consent
ethical
--> what if project is for education only? simulating past experiments? (like Transit of Venus)
ownership issues ---
gate-keeper --> like eBird having to fill out data request form
don't know how they are using it for sure
activity tracker data - quantified self
Report-back? - make them meaningful to volunteers, based on their level of understanding
-what about data that no one can make sense of?
--if you extract narrative out of data, then you are censoring in some way
--some say scientists does not have obligation to disclose everything
--can bury a real problem by giving people too much info
--if you see volunteers as collaborators, then you'd share more, and if you see as crowdsourcers, then wouldnt share as much
Intent -- people participate for reasons and those inform ethical obligations
Deception? like play with your dog project
when start human subjects research, lay out informed consent,
so why not do that with citizen science projects ---- manage
expectation with regard to all aspects of project and let
them agree to terms and conditions. don't want bait and switch.
-some cultures are more into procedures (like Brits)
-how data will be kept, who has access, etc. put rules of game ahead of time
--ethical treatment of animals under study, e.g., tons of flashes of cameras of frogs
token or edu - bioblitz iNat?
open hardware --- is that real access? difficult, no customer support
--really for non-proprietary systems
--open software used to be difficult too.
amateur scientists
-"independent research" is term in social sciences
used to be in 1930s and after that radio hams were in front of technology and helped build early
communication satelittles -- everyone built their own equipment (in 1950s)
trajectory of technology and adoption -- e.g., manned flight. 1903 to end of WWII to get travelling flight shows (barm storming)
-->after war, army sold aircraft and tech trickled down quickly
e.g., space flight -- rocket tech was amateur affair, even liquid fluid rocket was first in backyard,
and then after war was cold war technology and then only in hands of states, and
people criticize NASA as part of that establishment as reason space flight has
not advanced as much as it could have
-institutional safeguards can limit innovation spread, but that can be important
-when tech has potential to harm, put regulations on it
lawyer, doctor, soldier, priest -- 4 original professions
what is role of scientists? most are driven by ego, want nobel prize
-- or add to public good, increase body of knowledge