2 ms·
The example you gave is not relevant. The researchers in this study are already directly contacting everyone they need consent from, and if an individual declin
by dawnbreez 5y ago
The example you gave is not relevant. The researchers in this study are already directly contacting everyone they need consent from, and if an individual declines, the rest of the sample can still be studied (unlike in a classroom setting, where everyone's physically in the same room and it's impossible to study any of them in isolation).
Further, the study would still have worked if the researchers had simply asked for the information as researchers, instead of lying about their identity and making thinly-veiled threats of legal action if the subject doesn't comply.
- chana_masala 5y agoHeh, you should check out who you're replying to. He runs some kind of educational research platform.
- dr_dshiv 5y agoI’m not defending their study and I feel like you are trying to argue “sides” rather than trying to understand my point about nuance.
- dawnbreez 5y agoI'm primarily concerned with the study, since A) that's the topic at hand, B) it involves technology and privacy, which I care about, and C) people keep comparing this to pentesting, just like last time, and I also care about security research. I apologize for assuming that you were defending the study; I figured that was the topic of conversation, after all. If there is nuance, but it does not apply to this situation, then it is worth saying that this nuance does not apply to this situation--so that I'm less likely to misinterpret what you're saying.