Using the Online Medium for Discursive Research About People With Disabilities

Abstract

Online interviews are deemed an effective and appropriate approach for accessing discourse about the online experiences of people with disabilities. Some of the central arguments in support of conducting discursive research online, a type of qualitative approach, are delineated. Various practical benefits are considered for researchers, as well as participants-especially those with disabilities. Ethical issues surrounding access to, and the analysis of, readily available data in online communities are brought to the fore. In light of ethical dilemmas surrounding naturalistic data collection online, an alternative approach is offered, which utilizes online interviews with people with disabilities about their online experiences. A description of the data-collection process is given, including participants and recruitment, materials and procedures, rapport building, and security and ethics. Reflections on the process highlight how methodological pitfalls were managed and, in some cases, resolved.

Ethical dilemmas in researching sensitive issues online: lessons from the study of British disability dissent networks

“…This problem has been previously highlighted in other work investigating online disability communities. Most notably, in their pioneering discussion of methodological approaches towards online research involving disabled participants, Bowker and Tuffin (2004) categorically ruled out using naturalistic discourse analysis on online material due to the high number of variables and the level of risk involved. Clearly this would have constituted the safest of all possible approaches.…”

The ‘Battle of Stokes Croft’ on YouTube: The Development of an Ethical Stance for the Study of Online Comments

“…This perspective is also evident in the most recent iteration of the framework for ethical online research provided by the Although YouTube (2012) states explicitly in its Terms of Service that users should not expect 'confidentiality with respect to any content,' it was decided that the human subject perspective was the most appropriate framework for the study of YouTube comments in this project. As per previous work on internet research ethics (Bowker and Tuffin, 2004;Eysenbach and Till, 2001;Nissenbaum, 2010;Walther, 2002), this decision involved an assessment of any potential harm that these unaware participants would be exposed to through the use of their comments and the perceived level of privacy on the video-sharing website. The use of comments that expressed support for the rioters might have caused reputational harm to these participants and perhaps even led to their prosecution.…”

‘What is it like to have ME?’: The discursive construction of ME in computer-mediated communication and face-to-face interaction

“…However, none of the previous studies in this area have attended to the way in which the internet provides a domain for interactions and support among sufferers. Yet, internet communication offers a valuable resource for ME sufferers, as for others who are chronically ill (Hardy, 1999) or who have incapacitating physical or speech diffi culties (Bowker and Tuffi n, 2004). It is therefore imperative that researchers engage with these new forms of communication especially in regard to this client group.…”