IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v10y2022i1p361-370.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Ethics of Gatekeeping: How Guarding Access Influences Digital Child and Youth Research

Author

Listed:
  • Malin Fecke

    (Film University Babelsberg KONRAD WOLF, Germany)

  • Ada Fehr

    (Film University Babelsberg KONRAD WOLF, Germany)

  • Daniela Schlütz

    (Film University Babelsberg KONRAD WOLF, Germany)

  • Arne Freya Zillich

    (Film University Babelsberg KONRAD WOLF, Germany)

Abstract

Digital child and youth research is often conducted in schools involving minors. Corresponding research designs raise two related sets of problems: Ethical issues with regard to working with vulnerable groups like children and adolescents and access to these groups. The latter pertains to the concept of gatekeeping which is an ethical issue in and of itself if certain groups or areas of research are systematically excluded from empirical research and, consequently, from the resulting benefits. Thus, our study examines how perceived ethical challenges influence gatekeepers’ decisions to grant or deny access to investigate a potentially problematic topic: pupils’ group communication. We addressed this research question empirically via semi-structured in-depth interviews with eight educational gatekeepers in Germany inquiring their attitudes on research in schools in general and on the specific topic of pupils’ group communication via instant messaging as an exemplar of digital child and youth research. Approaching the question from two perspectives (procedural ethics and ethics in practice), we identified hierarchical power structures within multiple levels of gatekeeping and revealed rationales to deny access based on ethical considerations with regard to the given scenario of pupils’ group communication.

Suggested Citation

  • Malin Fecke & Ada Fehr & Daniela Schlütz & Arne Freya Zillich, 2022. "The Ethics of Gatekeeping: How Guarding Access Influences Digital Child and Youth Research," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 361-370.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v:10:y:2022:i:1:p:361-370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/4756
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agnès Nairn & Barbie Clarke, 2012. "Researching children : are we getting it right?," Post-Print hal-02312910, HAL.
    2. Sari Östman & Riikka Turtiainen, 2016. "From Research Ethics to Researching Ethics in an Online Specific Context," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(4), pages 66-74.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Claudia Riesmeyer & Arne Freya Zillich & Thorsten Naab, 2022. "Editorial: Digital Child- and Adulthood—Risks, Opportunities, and Challenges," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 301-304.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Niina Sormanen & Epp Lauk, 2016. "Issues of Ethics and Methods in Studying Social Media," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(4), pages 63-65.
    2. Hosany, A. R. Shaheen & Hosany, Sameer & He, Hongwei, 2022. "Children sustainable behaviour: A review and research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 236-257.
    3. Saima Husain & Amber G. Rashid, 2018. "Exploring brand symbolism amongst 10 year-old urban Pakistani children," Business Review, School of Economics and Social Sciences, IBA Karachi, vol. 13(2), pages 117-131, July-Dece.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v:10:y:2022:i:1:p:361-370. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.