Expanding the Role of Justice in Secondary Research Using Digital Psychological Data.

Secondary analysis of digital psychological data (DPD) is an increasingly popular method for behavioral health research. Under current practices, secondary research does not require human subjects research review so long as data are de-identified. We argue that this standard approach to the ethics of secondary research (i.e., de-identification) does not address a range of ethical risks and that greater emphasis should be placed on the ethical principle of justice. We outline the inadequacy of an individually focused research ethic for DPD and describe unaddressed "social risks" generated by secondary research of DPD. These risks exist in the "circumstances of justice": that is, a circumstance where individuals must cooperate to create a public good (e.g., research knowledge), and where it is impractical to individually exempt individuals. This requires researchers to emphasize the just allocation of benefits and burdens against a background of social cooperation. We explore six considerations for researchers who wish to conduct research with DPD without explicit consent: (a) create socially valuable knowledge, (b) fairly share the benefits and burdens of research, (c) be transparent about data use, (d) create mechanisms for withdrawal of data, (e) ensure that stakeholders can provide input into the design and implementation of the research, and (f) responsibly report results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]