Guías éticas para la investigación

AAA. (1998). Code of Ethics of the American Anthropological Association: American Anthropological Association. En URL: http://www.aaanet.org/committees/ethics/ethcode.htm

ASA. (1999). Ethical Guidelines for Good Research Practice. United Kingdom: Association of Social Anthropology. En URL: http://www.theasa.org/ethics/guidelines.htm

ISA. (2001). Code of Ethics: International Sociological Association. En URL: http://www.isa-sociology.org/about/isa_code_of_ethics.htm

NAPA. (1988). NAPA Ethical Guidelines: National Association for the Practice of Anthropology. En URL: http://www.practicinganthropology.org/about/?section=ethical_guidelines

NESH. (2001). Guidelines for research ethics in the social sciences, law and the humanities. Norway: The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH).

Ess, C. (2002). Ethical decision-making and Internet research: Recommendations from the AoIR ethics working committee: Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR). En URL: www.aoir.org/reports/ethics.pdf

Bibliografía seleccionada
Allen, C. (1996). What’s wrong with the “Golden Rule”? Conundrums of conducting ethical research in cyberspace. Information Society, 12, 175-187.

Bakardjieva, M., & Feenberg, A. (2001). Involving the Virtual Subject: conceptual, methodological an ethical dimensions. Journal of Ethics and Information Technology, 2(4), 233-240.

Bassett, E. H., & O’Riordan, K. (2002). Ethics of Internet Research: Contesting the Human Subjects Research Model. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), 233-247.

Bromseth, J. C. H. (2002). Public places – public activities? Methodological approaches and ethical dilemmas in research on computer mediated communication contexts. Paper presented at the Skikt-Researchers’ Conference.

Buchanan, E. A. (2004). Readings in Virtual Research Ethics: Issues and Controversies. Information Science Pub.

Cavanagh, A. (1999). Research Methodology Online Behaviour in Public?: Ethics in Online Ethnography. Cybersociology, 6.

Elgesem, D. (2002). What is special about the ethical issues in online research? Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), 195-203.

Estalella, A., & Ardèvol, E. (2007). Ética de campo: hacia una ética situada para la investigación etnográfica de internet. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 8(3).

Frankel, M. S., & Siang, S. (1999). Ethical and Legal Aspects of Human Subjects Research on the Internet: A Report of a Workshop. Washington: AAAS.

Hudson, J. M., & Bruckman, A. (2004). “Go Away”: Participant Objections to Being Studied and the Ethics of Chatroom Research. The Information Society, 20, 127-139.

King, S. (1996). Researching internet communities: proposed ethical guidelines for the reporting of results. The Information Society, 12(2), 119-129.

Sudweeks, F., & Rafaeli, S. (1996). How do you get a hundred strangers to agree: Computer mediated communication and collaboration. Computer networking and scholarship in the 21st century university, 115-136.

Ardèvol, E. (2007). La cámara en el campo. In UOC (Ed.), La búsqueda de una mirada: antropología visual y cine etnográfico (pp. 197-244). En:

Knuuttila, T. (2002). Signing for Reflexivity: Constructionist Rhetorics and Its Reflexive Critique in Science and Technology Studies. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 3(3). En:

Latour, B. (1988). The Politics of Explanation: An Alternative. In S. Woolgar (Ed.), Knowledge and Reflexivity. New Frontiers in the Sociology of Knowledge (pp. 155-177). London: Sage. En:

Lynch, M. (2000). Against Reflexivity as an Academic Virtue and Source of Privileged. Theory, Culture & Society, 17(3), 26-54. En:

Macbeth, D. (2001). On “Reflexivity” in Qualitative Research: Two Readings, and a Third. Qualitative Inquiry, 37(1), 35-68. En:

Ruby, J. (1980). Exposing yourself: Reflexivity, anthropology, and film. Semiotica, 30(1/2), 153-179. En: http://astro.temple.edu/~ruby/ruby/exposing.html.

Woolgar, S. (1988). Reflexivity is the Ethnographer of the Text. In S. Woolgar (Ed.), Knowledge and Reflexivity. New Frontiers in the Sociology of Knowledge (pp. 14-36). London: Sage. En:

Woolgar, S. (1982). Laboratory Studies: A Comment on the State of the Art. Social Studies of Science, 12(4), 481-498. En:

Wouters, P., Vann, K., Scharnhorst, A., Ratto, M., Hellsten, I., Fry, J., et al. (2007). Messy Shapes of Knowledge – STS Explores Informatization, New Media and Academic Work. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 319-352): MIT Press. En:

AAA. (1998). Code of Ethics of the American Anthropological Association: American Anthropological Association. En: http://www.aaanet.org/committees/ethics/ethcode.htm.

Bakardjieva, M., & Feenberg, A. (2001). Involving the Virtual Subject: Conceptual, Methodological and Ethical Dimensions. Journal of Ethics and Information Technology, 2(4), 233-240. En:

Bassett, E. H., & O’Riordan, K. (2002). Ethics of Internet Research: Contesting the Human Subjects Research Model. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), 233-247. En: http://www.nyu.edu/projects/nissenbaum/ethics_bassett.html.

Bromseth, J. C. H. (2002). Public places – public activities? Methodological approaches and ethical dilemmas in research on computermediated communication contexts. Paper presented at the Skikt-Researchers’ Conference. En:

Buchanan, E. A. (2004). Readings in Virtual Research Ethics: Issues and Controversies: Information Science Pub. En:

Elgesem, D. (2002). What is special about the ethical issues in online research? Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), 195-203. En: http://www.nyu.edu/projects/nissenbaum/ethics_elgesem.html.

Ess, C. (2002). Ethical decision-making and Internet research: Recommendations from the aoir ethics working committee: Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR). En: www.aoir.org/reports/ethics.pdf.

Forte, M. (2004). Co-Construction and Field Creation: Website Development as both an Instrument and Relationship in Action Research. In E. Buchanan (Ed.), Readings in Virtual Research Ethics: Issues and Controversies (pp. 219-245): Information Science Pub. En:

Frankel, M. S., & Siang, S. (1999). Ethical and Legal Aspects of Human Subjects Research on the Internet: A Report of a Workshop. Washington: American Association for the Advancement of Science. En: http://www.aaas.org/spp/dspp/sfrl/projects/intres/report.pdf.

Hudson, J. M., & Bruckman, A. (2002). IRC Francais: The Creation of an Internet-Based SLA Community. Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL), 15(2), 109-134. En:

King, S. (1996). Researching internet communities: proposed ethical guidelines for the reporting of results. The Information Society, 12(2), 119-129. En:

Mann, C., & Stewart, F. (2000). Internet Communication and Qualitative Research: a handbook for researching online: Sage Publications Inc. En:

NESH. (2001). Guidelines for research ethics in the social sciences, law and the humanities. Norway: The National Comittee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH). En:

Peden, B. F., & Flashinski, D. P. (2004). Virtual Research Ethics: A Content Analysis of Surveys and Experiments Online. In Readings in Virtual Research Ethics: Issues and Controversies (pp. 1-26): Information Science Pub. En:

Sharf, B. F. (1999). Beyond netiquette: The ethics of doing naturalistic discourse research on the Internet. In S. Jones (Ed.), Doing Internet research: Critical issues and methods for examining the Net (pp. 243-256). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. En:

Sudweeks, F., & Rafaeli, S. (1996). How do you get a hundred strangers to agree: Computer mediated communication and collaboration. Computer networking and scholarship in the 21st century university, 115-136. En:

Walther, J. B. (2002). Research Ethics in Internet-Enabled Research: Human Subjects Issues and Methodological Myopia. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), 205-216. En: http://www.nyu.edu/projects/nissenbaum/ethics_walther.html.