skip to main content
10.1145/3592813.3592900acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessbsiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

How to carry out a Brazilian research in computing considering ethical or moral aspects?

Published:26 June 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Context: Ethical aspects are of increasing interest to the computing communities. Part of this interest is related to ethics in research and institutional ethics related to research ethics committees. This phenomenon has also increased ethical or moral demands by institutions and academic-scientific collectives. Problem: Research in Ehics presents several issues, challenges, and difficulties, which go beyond a basic or superficial knowledge. These deficiencies or limitations have negative ethical consequences, including in a political sense, for the Brazilian computing community. Solution: We bring a collection of objective and informative reflections on these topics, which are rarely addressed or found in the computing literature, adequately suited to the IS context. Theory: Qualitative approach through Hermeneutics, Critical social theory, and Theory of reasoned action. Research method: Prescriptive and transformative, based on ethnography and autoethnography methodologies. Results and contributions to IS: We present several abstract and concrete considerations about advanced or non-trivial research ethics and ethics committee topics. We call the Brazilian computing community for advances in the agency of ethical or moral aspects, for moral advancement and sociotechnical awareness. The contribution addresses several issues, challenges, and difficult to find or unprecedented interpretation, e.g., involving data from social networks, annotators, children, internationalization, i.a. Aiming to promote moral maturity, as a common and shared understanding.

References

  1. T. E. Adams, S. H. Jones, and C. Ellis. 2022. In Handbook of autoethnography (2 ed.). Routledge, New York, NY, 201–213.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. P. Amorim, C. Sacramento, E. Capra, P. Tavares, and S. B. L. Ferreira. 2019. Submeter ou não meu projeto de pesquisa em IHC ao Comitê de Ética, eis a questão, In Proceedings of the 18th IHC-Br (Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil). Proceedings of the XVIII IHC-Br, Article 47, 11 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3357155.3358473Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. ANPEd. 2019. In Ética e pesquisa em Educação: subsídios – volume 1, J. Mainardes (Ed.). Vol. 1. ANPEd, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. ANPEd. 2021. In Ética e pesquisa em Educação: subsídios – volume 2, J. Mainardes (Ed.). Vol. 2. ANPEd, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. S. Baase and T. M. Henry. 2017. Gift of Fire, A: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues for Computing Technology (5 ed.). Pearson, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. E. Babbie. 2021. The Practice of Social Research. Cengage Learning, Boston, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. B. Bioni. 2019. Proteção de Dados Pessoais. A Função e os Limites do Consentimento (2nd ed.). Forense, Rio de Janeiro, RJ. (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. B. G. Blundell. 2021. Ethics in Computing, Science, and Engineering: A Student’s Guide to Doing Things Right. Springer, Heidelberg, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. C. Boscarioli, R. Araujo, and R. S. Maciel. 2017. I GranDSI-BR Grand Research Challenges in Information Systems in Brazil 2016-2026. SBC, Porto Alegre. https://doi.org/10.5753/sbc.2884.0Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Brasil. 2012. Ministério da Saúde. RESOLUÇÃO CNS Nº 466, DE 12 DE DEZEMBRO DE 2012. Retrieved 20-november-2022 from https://cutt.ly/mmS8EuaGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Brasil. 2016. Conselho Nacional da Saúde. RESOLUÇÃO Nº 510, DE 07 DE ABRIL DE 2016. Retrieved 20-november-2022 from https://cutt.ly/yjSF2LmGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Brasil. 2016. Ministério da Educação. RESOLUÇÃO Nº 5, DE 16 DE NOVEMBRO DE 2016. Retrieved 20-november-2022 from https://4658.short.gy/LnaYcwGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Brasil. 2018. LEI Nº 13.709, DE 14 DE AGOSTO DE 2018. Retrieved 20-november-2022 from https://4658.short.gy/thJx59Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Brasil. 2022. Ministério da Saúde. RESOLUÇÃO Nº 674, DE 06 DE MAIO DE 2022. Retrieved 20-november-2022 from https://4658.short.gy/wTRDCwGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. K. Buston, W. Parry-Jones, M. Livingston, A. Bogan, and S. Wood. 1991. Qualitative research. BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY 172 (1991), 197–199.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. I. Carter. 2022. Positive and Negative Liberty. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2022 ed.), E. N. Zalta (Ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 20-november-2022 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2022/entries/liberty-positive-negative/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. L. P. Carvalho, J. Oliveira, and F. M. Santoro. 2021. A Presença de Conteúdos sobre Ética Computacional na Literacia em Computação Institucional Brasileira. In ABCiber Virtual Meeting Proceedings (Online). ABCiber Virtual Meeting 2021. Retrieved 20-november-2022 from https://4658.short.gy/ASuutbGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. L. P. Carvalho, J. Oliveira, F. M. Santoro, and Claudia Cappelli. 2021. Social Network Analysis, Ethics and LGPD, considerations in research. iSys - Brazilian Journal of Information Systems 14, 2 (Aug. 2021), 28–52. https://doi.org/10.5753/isys.2021.1235Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. L. P. Carvalho, F. M. Santoro, R. M. M. Costa, and J. Oliveira. 2021. Pensando-fazendo Sistemas de Informação com Ética. Da pesquisa à engenharia, e vice-versa. In Minicursos da ERSI-RJ 2021 - VII ERSI-RJ, T. C. de França, A. Louzada, and A. Cerqueira and (Eds.). SBC, Porto Alegre, RS. https://doi.org/10.5753/sbc.7872.6.6Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. L. P. Carvalho, F. M. Santoro, and J. Oliveira. 2022. An exploratory analysis of Computing Ethics practices and instruction through Brazilian cyberspace. Journal on Interactive Systems 13, 1 (Nov. 2022), 274–300. https://doi.org/10.5753/jis.2022.2604Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. L. P. Carvalho, J. A. Suzano, J. Oliveira, I. Gasparini, and F. M. Santoro. 2021. Ethics: What is the Research Scenario in the Brazilian Symposium SBIE?. In Anais do XXXII Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação (Online). SBC, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil, 1308–1319. https://doi.org/10.5753/sbie.2021.218618Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. L. P. Carvalho, J. A. Suzano, J. Oliveira, and F. Santoro. 2021. Ethics: What is the Research Scenario in the Brazilian Symposium SBSI?. In Anais da VII ERSI-RJ (Evento Online). SBC, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil, 24–31. https://doi.org/10.5753/ersirj.2021.16975Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. L. P. Carvalho, J. A. Suzano, F. M. Santoro, and J. Oliveira. 2022. A meta-scientific broad panorama of ethical aspects in the Brazilian IHC. Journal on Interactive Systems 13, 1 (Aug. 2022), 105–126. https://doi.org/10.5753/jis.2022.2579Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. L. P. Carvalho, J. A. Suzano, F. M. Santoro, J. Oliveira, and R. M. M. Costa. 2021. Ética: Qual o Panorama de Pesquisa no Simpósio Brasileiro SBGames?. In Anais do XX SBGames (Online). SBC, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. J. W. Creswell and J. D. Creswell. 2018. Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5 ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. J. A. de Cerqueira, H. A. Tives, and E. D. Canedo. 2021. Ethical Guidelines and Principles in the Context of Artificial Intelligence. In XVII Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems (Uberlândia, Brazil) (SBSI 2021). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 36, 8 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3466933.3466969Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. C. A. Ferraz. 2014. Ética Elementos Básicos. NEPFIL online, Pelotas, RS.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. T. George. 2021. Hermeneutics. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 ed.), Edward N. Zalta (Ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 20-november-2022 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/hermeneutics/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. K. Laudon and J. Laudon. 2020. Management Information Systems: Managing the Digital Firm (16 ed.). Pearson, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. A. B. de Lima. 2015. Ética em pesquisa: implicações para a educação superior. Crítica Educativa 1, 1 (out. 2015), p.8–20. https://doi.org/10.22476/revcted.v1i1.21Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. D. Marcondes. 2007. Textos básicos de ética: De Platão a Foucault. Zahar, Rio de Janeiro, RJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. V. F. Martins, M. A. Junqueira, and R. M. de Araujo. 2021. Ética da Pesquisa em Sistemas de Informação: Por que e como submeter meu projeto ao Comitê de Ética?. In Tópicos Especiais em Sistemas de Informação: Minicursos SBSI 2021, D. Viana, T. P. Ribeiro, R. D. Araújo, and F. A. Dorça (Eds.). SBC, Porto Alegre, RS. https://doi.org/10.5753/sbc.6453.5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Ministério da Saúde. Conselho Nacional de Saúde.2007. Manual operacional para comitês de ética em pesquisa. Editora do Ministério da Saúde. https://4658.short.gy/tulAQ2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. William Lawrence Neuman. 2014. Basics of Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Pearson, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. J. Recker. 2021. Scientific research in information systems: a beginner’s guide (2 ed.). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. M. J. Salganik. 2017. Bit by Bit: Social Research in the Digital Age. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. P. Singer. 2022. Ethics. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/ethics-philosophy [accessed 09-09-2022].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. R. M. Stair and G. W. Reynolds. 2018. Principles of Information Systems (13 ed.). CENGAGE Learning, Boston, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. A. S. Vázquez. 2018. Ética (39th ed.). Civilização Brasileira.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. R. J. Wieringa. 2014. Design science methodology: For information systems and software engineering. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, London, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. E. Wiesel. 2005. Without Conscience. New England Journal of Medicine 352, 15 (2005), 1511–1513. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp058069Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. How to carry out a Brazilian research in computing considering ethical or moral aspects?

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          SBSI '23: Proceedings of the XIX Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems
          May 2023
          490 pages

          Copyright © 2023 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 26 June 2023

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate181of557submissions,32%
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)32
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format