¶¹°ü³ÉÈË°æ

Background

Social media (such as X, Tik Tok, Instagram, WeChat, Reddit or Facebook) and other online platforms (such as Amazon, YouTube, Uber, or eBay) are rich sources of data about human activity which present a valuable new tool for researchers to explore and utilise. 

Use of data collected via these platforms can, however, present practical, legal and ethical challenges for researchers, and these should be given thorough consideration during the research design and planning phases of a project. 

Whilst data from social media and other online platforms may often seem readily available and ‘easy’ to access, there are significant ethical and legal considerations for researchers to be aware of. It is important to note that all research requires proportionate ethics review via the University’s ethics review process. 

This page highlights some considerations for researchers and provides links to both internal and external resources for further guidance. 

Ethical Considerations

‘Public’ vs. ‘private’

Researchers need to consider the extent to which the social media posts they wish to use are considered ‘public’ or ‘private’. The British Psychological Society highlights challenges and important considerations for researchers in . It can be difficult to establish whether an online space is public or private, as people’s views on privacy differ. In some contexts, online users may expect their posts to only be visible by certain people (e.g., within a ‘private’ group or network which requires a password or membership), whereas posting on an open discussion forum, or using a ‘trending hashtag’ to voice opinions amongst others on Twitter/X may be considered public (see also ). However, it is important to note that these contexts can change. For example, a ‘private’ post might later become publicly visible if privacy settings are altered, or if deleted content is still being stored elsewhere (British Psychological Society, 2021). Researchers need to be mindful that even in contexts where online communication is perceived as visible and traceable, it does not necessarily mean that it is ethical to proceed with using the posts for research purposes. 

You can find more guidance about recruiting research participants here.

Anonymity and confidentiality

It is important to consider that anonymity and confidentiality may be impossible to achieve when using social media data. This is because even in cases where original usernames/identifiers have been removed or pseudonymised, quotes or excerpts from the original post could be pasted into an internet search engine which would resolve the content back to its original source, revealing the identity of the user . 

Further guidance about anonymisation and pseudonymisation is available here.

Consent

Obtaining informed consent is a crucial step in carrying out research with human participants. When considering collecting data via social media platforms, researchers need to consider to what extent have platform users provided consent for their posts to be used in research, if at all. Online platforms use different methods to inform their users about potential uses of their data, but it is the researchers’ responsibility to ensure that the subjects of their study have explicitly agreed to certain conditions, and that the researchers themselves are complying with the terms of use issued by the platform. In instances where consent is not possible or feasible, researchers will need to ensure that this is clearly articulated in their application for ethics review.

Withdrawal

Another key aspect of ethical research is participants’ right to withdraw from participating in a research project at any point. As such, it is important to consider how withdrawal of data can occur in the context of social media research. For example, data collected from social media platforms often represent a ‘snapshot’ of the information available at the time, but individuals may subsequently delete or amend their social media posts after data collection has taken place. Researchers should consider whether and how they could ever know about this, and if applicable, what the implications might be.

In many cases, it is unlikely that researchers would be able to effectively contact social media users about using their data and the options/implications of withdrawal, so it is important to consider how consent may be sought and what procedures may be required for managing or accommodating potential withdrawals of data. 

Duty of care

In line with the ¶¹°ü³ÉÈË°æ’s code of good practice in research integrity, researchers must ensure the dignity, rights, safety and wellbeing of all those involved in research and avoid unreasonable risk or harm to all participants in and subjects of research (section 2.11).

In some contexts, researchers can provide debriefing information to participants following their involvement in a research project, offering further information about the study and signposting to resources or support. However, with social media research it is unlikely to be possible to debrief participants due to the lack of direct contact or traceability. This means it may not be possible to provide effective care or signposting following their data being used in the project. Researchers need to consider ways to mitigate this and identify whether it is appropriate to proceed with social media as a means of collecting data. 

Legal Considerations

Terms of Service agreements

One challenge for researchers is the impact of platform Terms of Service (ToS) agreements, which may appear to place restrictions on access to data or use of services. Researchers need to consider the impact of ToS agreements on their research activity and how to navigate the constraints they impose. 

• Impact of Terms of Service on research: ToS agreements can limit what types of data can be accessed, used, and processed. Researchers should familiarise themselves with requirements which are relevant to their project and note that these can vary between platforms. 

• Potential restrictions: It may seem that some ToS requirements could block certain research activities, by introducing conditions which it would not be feasible to comply with. The University supports open research for the public good, and researchers are encouraged to seek legal advice to ensure reasonable steps are taken to limit exposure to risk. Legal advice should be sought from the University’s legal team via legal-shared@bath.ac.uk.

• Data collection vs. sharing: Collecting data and ‘sharing’ it are distinct activities, each with their own risks and considerations. Researchers should avoid sharing data if this is prohibited by ToS. However, this can present problems where the data forms an integral part of the correct publication of the research. In these cases, bespoke solutions must be found that satisfy both ToS agreements and research integrity. 

• Ethics applications: When preparing ethics applications, researchers should note that whilst detailed evidence relating to ToS agreements is not usually required, it is important to indicate an awareness that their research will need to navigate these requirements and that implications have been considered appropriately. Where awareness and understanding of relevant ToS is not indicated, the research ethics committee may highlight these considerations within feedback. 

Researchers are advised to contact the legal team via legal-shared@bath.ac.uk if they have any queries pertaining to terms of service or other legal advice.

Data Protection

Research being carried out at the ¶¹°ü³ÉÈË°æ must be compliant with relevant Data Protection legislation.​

Original posts on social media are considered personal data if the individual could be identifiable. The posts may also contain ‘special category’ (sensitive) personal data which has additional considerations.​

Researchers should make efforts to inform individuals that their data is going to be used for research purposes, but the efforts required should be proportionate to the nature and context of the research activity.

Researchers using social media posts for research must confirm the classification of the data they are working with and familiarise themselves with the requirements of GDPR to make sure their research activity is compliant.​

Two points to note are that processing personal data requires there to be a ‘lawful basis’ to meet Article 6 of GDPR. The lawful basis for research is ‘public task’ which means that the data are being processed for research which is in the public interest. ​

Secondly, if processing ‘special category’ personal data, this needs to meet additional/further legal bases to comply with GDPR. In this case, the basis that the data ‘have been made public by the subject’ would mean this data can be processed in compliance with GDPR (this relates to Article 9). This means that if someone posts a public Tweet about their own health condition, the have effectively ‘made this public’ and it can be processed for research purposes .​

Researchers are advised to contact the Data Protection Team via dataprotection@bath.ac.uk if they have any queries pertaining to data protection matters.

Resources

• Guidance about information classification can be found here

• The Research Governance and Compliance Team run monthly ‘Open House’ sessions on various research ethics and integrity topics. You can view the upcoming programme here and access . Key relevant sessions include ‘Research using Social Media’ and ‘GDPR for Research’.

• Guidance about developing Data Management Plans can be found via the .

• The Library also share a range of training courses and materials for researchers.

References

• British Psychological Society. (2021). Ethics guidelines for internet-mediated research (Chapter 5)

• Gold, N., (2020). Using Twitter Data in Research, Guidance for Researchers and Ethics Reviewers,

• Kamocki, P., Hannesschläger, V., Hoorn, E., Kelli, A., Kupietz, M., Lindén, K., & Puksas, A. (2022).

• Townsend, L., & Wallace, C. (2016) Social Media Research: A Guide to Ethics