Facebook is under major scrutiny after conducting a controversial study that manipulated users’ news feeds to assess the effects on their emotions.
Now, a Facebook data scientist is apologizing for angering some 700,000 users during the manipulation, in which researchers used algorithms on news feeds for one week in January 2012, to see whether a mostly positive — or a mostly negative — feed would elicit different types of status updates. The findings were published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal.
But here’s the shade — researchers didn’t inform users that they were manipulating their feeds. Many Facebook users are now angered, believing they should have been notified.
Cornell University’s board of ethics says they did not pre-approve the study. A statement issued Monday by the university clarified that the experiment was conducted before their Institutional Review Board was consulted. Cornell professor Jeffrey Hancock and doctoral student Jamie Guillory both worked with Facebook to conduct the study, but the university made a statement distancing itself from all the controversy:
“Professor Hancock and Dr. Guillory did not participate in data collection and did not have access to user data. Their work was limited to initial discussions, analyzing the research results and working with colleagues from Facebook to prepare the peer-reviewed paper “Experimental Evidence of Massive-Scale Emotional Contagion through Social Networks.”
They went on to seal the deal by suggesting that the professor only worked on the completed data and had no part in the manipulation of news feeds:
“Because the research was conducted independently by Facebook and Professor Hancock had access only to results – and not to any data at any time – Cornell University’s Institutional Review Board concluded that he was not directly engaged in human research and that no review by the Cornell Human Research Protection Program was required.”
Facebook claims the fine print users agreed to when they created an account includes “informed consent” to participate in the study. Facebook’s current data use policy says user information can be used for “internal operations” that includes “research.”
Plot twist! That’s not what the policy said in 2012 at the time the study was conducted. According to Forbes, Facebook didn’t add the bit about “internal operations” and “research” until September 2012, four months after the study was completed.
A Facebook spokesperson told Forbes:
“When someone signs up for Facebook, we’ve always asked permission to use their information to provide and enhance the services we offer. To suggest we conducted any corporate research without permission is complete fiction. Companies that want to improve their services use the information their customers provide, whether or not their privacy policy uses the word ‘research’ or not.”
The American Psychological Association’s “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct” states the research standard procedure is as follows:
“Psychologists explain any deception that is an integral feature of the design and conduct of an experiment to participants as early as is feasible…”
Clearly these social media sites “ain’t loyal.” For more information on the study, click here.
SOURCE: WashingtonPost | PHOTO CREDIT: Getty
