I am concerned about "any other academic group or organization" who might get the results without being aware of the poor methodology used in arriving at them due to not seeing the survey itself or due to being misled by the implication that KI and CARAS are somehow involved. As for KI and CARAS themselves, my concerns are different: it is possible that other research scientists will see this survey and think that KI/CARAS are associated with it, which would reflect very poorly on those institutions due to its sloppiness and lack of basic human subject standards. That's part of why I brought it to their attention in the first place.
My other concerns include the human subjects whose information may be used against them (e.g. outing via IP logging) with no recourse. If you would not consider it sufficient that I care about the well-being of people who participate in such research, I also find it in my interests that lay people be able to discern good quality human research from poor quality human research *before* it bites them in the ass, causing them and members of their social network to decide to not participate in research in the future. Which leads into another concern: human research already has a bad enough name, it doesn't need to be dragged further through the muck by well-meaning yet irresponsible pseudo-researchers. Finally, badly done science is a pet peeve of mine, right up there with people who use "schizophrenic" when they mean Multiple Personality Disorder.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-08-05 08:25 pm (UTC)My other concerns include the human subjects whose information may be used against them (e.g. outing via IP logging) with no recourse. If you would not consider it sufficient that I care about the well-being of people who participate in such research, I also find it in my interests that lay people be able to discern good quality human research from poor quality human research *before* it bites them in the ass, causing them and members of their social network to decide to not participate in research in the future. Which leads into another concern: human research already has a bad enough name, it doesn't need to be dragged further through the muck by well-meaning yet irresponsible pseudo-researchers. Finally, badly done science is a pet peeve of mine, right up there with people who use "schizophrenic" when they mean Multiple Personality Disorder.