PequegnatW.Simon RosserB. R.BowenA. M.BullS. S.DiClementeR. J.BocktingW. O.ElfordJ., “Conducting Internet-based HIV/STD Prevention Survey Research: Considerations in Design and Evaluation,”AIDS and Behavior11, no. 4 (2007): 505–521.
2.
BauermeisterJ. A.PingelE.ZimmermanM.CouperM.Carballo-DiéguezA.StrecherV. J., “Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data,”Field Methods24, no. 3 (2012): 272–291;.
3.
BauermeisterJ. A.ZimmermanM. A.JohnsM. M.GlowackiP.StoddardS.VolzE., “Innovative Recruitment Using Online Networks: Lessons Learned from an Online Study of Alcohol and Other Drug Use Utilizing a Web-Based, Respondent-Driven Sampling (webRDS) Strategy,”Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs73, no. 5 (2012): 834;.
4.
BowenA. M.DanielC. M.WilliamsM. L.BairdG. L., “Identifying Multiple Submissions in Internet Research: Preserving Data Integrity,”AIDS and Behavior12, no. 6 (2008): 964–973;.
5.
KrautR.OlsonJ.BanajiM.BruckmanA.CohenJ.CouperM., “Psychological Research Online: Report of Board of Scientific Affairs' Advisory Group on the Conduct of Research on the Internet,”American Psychologist59, no. 2 (2004): 105.
6.
BartellA. L.SpyridakisJ. H., “Managing Risk in Internet-Based Survey Research,” in Professional Communication Conference (IPCC), 2012 IEEE International, at 1–6;.
7.
BirnbaumM. H., “Human Research and Data Collection via the Internet,”Annual Review of Psychology55 (2004): 803–832;.
8.
GoslingS. D.VazireS.SrivastavaS.JohnO. P., “Should We Trust Web-Based Studies? A Comparative Analysis of Six Preconceptions about Internet Questionnaires,”American Psychologist59, no. 2 (2004): 93–104;.
9.
KonstanJ. A.Simon RosserB. R.RossM. W.StantonJ.EdwardsW. M., “The Story of Subject Naught: A Cautionary but Optimistic Tale of Internet Survey Research,”Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication10, no. 2 (2005);.
10.
MinerM. H.BocktingW. O.Swinburne RomineR.RamanS., “Conducting Internet Research with the Transgender Population: Reaching Broad Samples and Collecting Valid Data,”Social Science Computer review30, no. 2 (2012): 202–211;.
11.
MuschJ.ReipsU-D., “A Brief History of Web Experimenting,” in BirnbaumM. H., ed., Psychological Experiments on the Internet (San Diego: Elsevier, 2000): 61–87;.
12.
MustanskiB. S., “Getting wired: Exploiting the Internet for the Collection of Valid Sexuality Data,”Journal of Sex Research38, no. 4 (2001): 292–301;.
13.
NosekB. A.BanajiM. R.GreenwaldA. G., “E-Research: Ethics, Security, Design, and Control in Psychological Research on the Internet,”Journal of Social Issues58, no. 1 (2002): 161–176;.
14.
ReipsU.-D., “Internet-Based Psychological Experimenting Five Dos and Five Don'ts,”Social Science Computer Review20, no. 3 (2002): 241–249;.
15.
ReipsU.-D., “Standards for Internet-Based Experimenting,”Experimental Psychology (formerly Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie) 49, no. 4 (2002): 243–256;.
16.
RiggleE. D. B.RostoskyS. S.ReedyC. S., “Online Surveys for BGLT Research: Issues and Techniques,”Journal of Homosexuality49, no. 2 (2005): 1–21;.
17.
see also Bauermeister, “Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data,”supra note 2;.
18.
Bauermeister, “Innovative Recruitment Using Online Networks: Lessons Learned from an Online Study of Alcohol and Other Drug Use Utilizing a Web-Based, Respondent-Driven Sampling (webRDS) Strategy,”supra note 2;.
19.
Kraut, supra note 2.
20.
See Bauermeister“Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data,”supra note 2.
21.
Swinburne RomineR.MinerM. H.GonzalezC.HoeferC.BocktingW. O., “The Effects of Fraudulent Respondents on Internet-Based Research with Hard to Reach Populations: Experience from All Gender Health Online,”unpublished manuscript (2014).
22.
SangerD. E.PelrothN., “Chinese Hackers Resume Attacks on U.S. Target,”New York Times, May 19, 2013.
23.
See Birnbaum, supra note 3;.
24.
MuschReips, supra note 3;.
25.
Reips“Internet-Based Psychological Experimenting Five Dos and Five Don'ts,”supra note 3, Reips, “Standards for Internet-Based Experimenting,” supra note 3.
26.
See Reips“Standards for Internet-Based Experimenting,”supra note 3.
27.
See Bauermeister“Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data,”supra note 2;.
28.
Gosling, supra note 3.
29.
See Birnbaum, supra note 3.
30.
Id.; Gosling, supra note 3.
31.
See Reips, “Standards for Internet-Based Experimenting,”supra note 3.
32.
See Mustanski, supra note 3.
33.
Id, at 297.
34.
See Birnbaum, supra note 3.
35.
See Bowen, supra note 2.
36.
ManzoA. N.BurkeJ. M., “Increasing Response Rate in Web-Based/Internet Surveys,” in GideonL., ed., Handbook of Survey Methodology for the Social Sciences (New York: Springer, 2012): At 327–343.
37.
GöritzA. S., “Incentives in Web Studies: Methodological Issues and a Review,”International Journal of Internet Science1, no. 1 (2006): 58–70.
See Bauermeister, “Data Quality in HIV/AIDS We&Based Surveys Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data,”supra note 2.
44.
See Bauermeister“Innovative Recruitment Using Online Networks: Lessons Learned from an Online Study of Alcohol and Other Drug Use Utilizing a Web-Based, Respondent-Driven Sampling (webRDS) Strategy,”supra note 2.
45.
See Bowen, supra note 2.
46.
BauermeisterJ. A.YeagleyE.MeanleyS.PingelE. S., “Sexting among Young Men Who Have Sex with Men: Results from a National Survey,”Journal of Adolescent Health54, no. 5 (2014): 606–611.
47.
See Bowen, supra note 2.
48.
MorenoM. A.FostN. C.ChristakisD. A., “Research Ethics in the MySpace Era,”Pediatrics121, no. 1 (2008): 157–161.
49.
See Bartell, supra note 3;.
50.
Nosek, supra note 3.
51.
See RomineSwinburne, supra note 5.
52.
See Miner, supra note 3;.
53.
Riggle, supra note 3.
54.
See Nosek, supra note 3.
55.
KingM. F.BrunerG. C., “Social Desirability Bias: A Neglected Aspect of Validity Testing.”Psychology & Marketing17, no. 2 (2000): 79–103;.
56.
RandallD. M.FernandesM. F.“The Social Desirability Response Bias in Ethics Research,”Journal of Business Ethics10, no. 11 (1991): 805–817.
57.
Von AhnL.BlumM.HopperN. J.LangfordJ., “CAPTCHA: Using Hard AI Problems for Security,” in BihamE.ed., Advances in Cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2003 (Berlin: Springer, 2003), 294–311.
58.
Id.; The Official CAPTCHA Site, available at <at www.captcha.net> (last visited February 19, 2015).
59.
The Official CAPTCHA Site, available at <at www.captcha.net> (last visited February 19, 2015).
60.
StiegerS.ReipsU.-D., “What are Participants Doing While Filling in an Online Questionnaire: A Paradata Collection Tool and an Empirical Study,”Computers in Human Behavior26, no. 6 (2010): 1488–1495.
HumphreysL.“The Sociologist as Voyeur,” In GoldenM.P. ed., The Research Experience, (Itasca: Peacock, 1976): 101–114.
77.
OhmP., “Broken Promises of Privacy: Responding to the Surprising Failure of Anonymization,”UCLA Law Review57, no. 6 (2010): 1701–1777.
78.
See Birnbaum, supra note 3;.
79.
Miner, supra note 3.
80.
See Bauermeister“Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data,”supra note 2;.
81.
Birnbaum, supra note 3;.
82.
Bowen, supra note 2.
83.
See Bauermeister“Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data,”supra note 2;.
84.
Bowen, supra note 2.
85.
See RomineSwinburne, supra note 5.
86.
BuchananE. J.AycockS.DexterD.DittrichD.HvizdakE., “Computer Science Security Research And Human Subjects: Emerging Considerations For Research Ethics Boards,”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics6, no. 2 (2011): 71–83.
87.
Id.;.
88.
SoloveD. J.SchwartzP. M., “Reconciling Personal Information in the United States and European Union” (2013) GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works, Paper 956, available at <http://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications/956> (last visited February 19, 2015).
89.
Van GelderM. M. H. J.BretveldR.W.RoeleveldN., “Web-Based Questionnaires: The Future in Epidemiology?”American Journal of Epidemiology172, no. 11 (2010): 1292–1298.
Reips, “Standards for Internet-Based Experimenting,”supra note 3.
95.
See Bauermeister“Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data,”supra note 2.
96.
Id.; see also Mustanski, supra note 3.
97.
See Romine, supra note 5.
98.
RosserB. R. S.GurakL.HorvathK. J.OakesJ. M.KonstanJ.DanilenkoG., “The Challenges of Ensuring Participant Consent in Internet-Based Sex Studies: A Case Study of the Men's INTernet Sex (MINTS I and II) Studies,”Journal of Computer Mediated Communication14, no. 3 (2009): 602–626.
99.
See Miner, supra note 3.
100.
VrijA., “Why Professionals Fail to Catch Liars and How They Can Improve,”Legal and Criminological Psychology9, no. 2 (2004): 159–181.
National Institute of Health (NIH), Office of Extramural Research, Certificate of Confidentiality Kiosk, available at <http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/coc> (last visited February 19, 2015).
103.
See Romine, supra note 5.
104.
RosserB. R. S.OakesJ. M.KonstanJ.HooperS.HorvathK. J.DanilenkoG. P.NygaardK. E.SmolenskiD. J., “Reducing HIV Risk Behavior of MSM through Persuasive Computing: Results of the Men's INTernet Study (MINTS-II),”AIDS24, no. 3 (2010): 2099–2107.
105.
See Bauermeister, “Data Quality in HIV/AIDS Web-Based Surveys Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data,”supra note 2;.