Revelations of personal matters often have negative consequences for social-media users. These consequences trigger frequent warnings, practical rather than moral in nature, that social-media users should consider carefully what they reveal about themselves since their revelations might cause them various difficulties in the future. I set aside such practical considerations and argue that social-media users have a moral obligation to maintain their own privacy that is rooted in the duty to self-censor. Although Anita L. Allen provides a paternalist justification of (...) the duty that supports my position that social-media users are obligated to self-censor what they reveal about themselves, I justify the obligation through considerations that are more palatable to liberals than is paternalism. I accomplish this by arguing that the failure to self-censor often creates for others undue burdens that individuals are obligated morally not to create. In particular, social-media revelations often create undue burdens for those, such as employers and university personnel, who are obligated morally to respect individuals’ privacy in their decision-making processes. I also demonstrate that this argument is not for a broad duty to self-censor, but, rather, for a narrow duty that applies to particular circumstances such as certain uses of social media. (shrink)

In the academic world, a researcher's number of publications can carry huge professional and financial rewards. This truth has led to many unethical authorship assignments throughout the world of publishing, including within faculty-student collaborations. Although the American Psychological Association passed a revised code of ethics in 1992 with special rules pertaining to such collaborative efforts, it is widely acknowledged that unethical assignments of authorship credit continue to occur regularly. This study found that of the 604 APA-member respondents, 165 felt they (...) had been involved in an unethical or unfair authorship assignment. Furthermore, nontenured faculty members and women were statistically more likely to be involved in an unethical or unfair assignment of authorship credit than tenured faculty members or men. (shrink)

The booming popularity of the Internet, and particularly increasing use of personal Web sites, social networking sites, and blogging, raises questions regarding the ethical use of psychology graduate students' personal online information for academic purposes. Given rising controversies such as use of such information to screen applicants, I refer to the principles and standards of the Ethics Code of the American Psychological Association (2002) to examine ethical concerns associated with graduate students' personal information on the Internet, namely, the protection of (...) privacy, use of informed consent, consideration of autonomy, and implications for students' clinical work. Finally, I make several recommendations for graduate training faculty and graduate students as they consider placing and using information on and from the Internet. (shrink)

Increasingly, the Internet is proving to be an important research tool. Today, cyberspace affords researchers easy access to traditionally difficult to reach populations, a host of virtual communities, and a wealth of data created through computer-mediated-communication. This newfound research frontier brings with it, however, a multiplicity of ethical concerns, including: (1) whether the Internet constitutes a private or public space; (2) whether the human subject paradigm is appropriate when considering the ethics of Internet research; and (3) whether cyber participants/‘speakers-as-writers’ and (...) communities should be guaranteed confidentiality and anonymity when researchers contain or consider them in research. This paper examines these specific ethical concerns as they relate to Canada's Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, which, as yet, does not explicitly address ethics involved in Internet research. I propose that in large part the Internet is by definition a public site of activity, and as such, many posters cannot expect their texts to remain confidential, nor their names anonymous, and that the human subject paradigm is highly problematic in terms of regulating ethics involved in some research generated through new information technologies. This is most expressly the case with computer-mediated-communication, which, in light of the Tri-Council Policy Statement, can be viewed as theoretically akin to public entertainment and performance. (shrink)