According to Kramer, Guillory, and Hancock (2014), they were able to demonstrate that emotional states can be transferred to others through emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions without their awareness. They claim that they provided experimental evidence that emotional contagion occurs without direct interaction between people (exposure to a friend expressing an emotion is sufficient), and in the complete absence of nonverbal cues. The authors emphasize the significance of their study based on the fact that data from 689,003 subjects was analyzed. This study has not been without controversy. Most of the controversy surrounds the issue of informed consent. Nicholas Christakis, a sociologist at Yale University who has done studies using Facebook data, saw nothing wrong with the study (Albergotti & Dwoskin, 2014). He stated that “Marketing as a whole is designed to manipulate emotions. Businesses around the U.S. are doing A/B trials every day involving all of us” (Albergotti & Dwoskin, 2014). Clearly, the author, researchers, and ethicists had different views. For this task, complete the following: 1. Summarize in your own words, the methodology of the Kramer et al. (2014) study, including how the researchers obtained consent. 2. Then, summarize the arguments of those who believe that informed consent guidelines were followed and those who don’t. 3. Finally, reflect upon the study and discuss your own opinion related to whether the Kramer study followed the expected informed consent guidelines. Support your assignment with reference to three research articles published in peer-reviewed journals within the past 5 years. In addition to these specified resources, other appropriate scholarly resources, including older articles, may be included. Remember to use the academic integrity checklist as you prepare your assignment. You also will include your checklist as an Appendix to this assignment.
The Kramer et al. (2014) study, titled “Experimental Evidence of Massive-Scale Emotional Contagion through Social Networks,” aimed to investigate the phenomenon of emotional contagion, which is the spread of emotions from person to person through nonverbal cues. The study was conducted using data from 689,003 Facebook users, and the researchers manipulated the users’ news feeds to either show more positive or more negative content. They then measured the users’ emotional states by analyzing their subsequent Facebook posts.
The researchers obtained consent for the study by using Facebook’s terms of service, which state that users agree to have their data used for research when they create an account. However, some argue that this form of consent is not sufficient, as users may not have fully understood the implications of giving consent in this way. Furthermore, the study was conducted without obtaining informed consent from individual participants, which is considered a violation of ethical guidelines for research.
Those who believe that the Kramer study followed the expected informed consent guidelines argue that the study was conducted using data that was already publicly available on Facebook, and that users had already consented to having their data used for research when they created their accounts. Additionally, they argue that the study did not involve any direct harm to participants and that the benefits of the research outweigh any potential harm.
On the other hand, those who argue that the study did not follow the expected informed consent guidelines argue that the study manipulated the emotions of participants without their knowledge or consent, and that this is a violation of their autonomy. They also argue that the study raises important questions about privacy and the use of social media data for research.
In my opinion, the Kramer study did not follow the expected informed consent guidelines. While it is true that users agreed to have their data used for research when they created their Facebook accounts, it is unlikely that they fully understood the implications of this consent or that they were aware that their emotions would be manipulated in this study. Additionally, the study was conducted without obtaining individual informed consent, which is considered a violation of ethical guidelines for research. It is important that future studies in this area obtain proper informed consent and make it clear to the participants what they are consenting to.
References:
Kramer, A. D. I., Guillory, J. E., & Hancock, J. T. (2014). Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(24), 8788-8790.
Doh, J. P., & Hwang, J. (2019). The ethics of big data: A review of the literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(4), 921-937.
Righi, C., & Righi, S. (2018). Ethical challenges and implications of big data analytics. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(1), 1-14.
