The scientific journal that published a controversial Facebook
experiment on mood manipulation said Thursday it was concerned that the
company did not follow scientific ethics and principles of informed
consent.
While it stopped short of retracting the study, the
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences said it typically
publishes experiments that have allowed subjects to opt out of research.
Facebook
appeared to have been exempt from this rule because all users agree to a
policy on data use when they open an account, constituting informed
consent for research, according to PNAS.
"Based on the information
provided by the authors, PNAS editors deemed it appropriate to publish
the paper," said a statement by editor-in-chief Inder Verma.
"It
is nevertheless a matter of concern that the collection of the data by
Facebook may have involved practices that were not fully consistent with
the principles of obtaining informed consent and allowing participants
to opt out."
The journal explained that the US government protects
those who participate in research by establishing best practices that
scientists obtain informed consent and allowing subjects to opt out, a
policy known as the Common Rule.
It said that Cornell University
reviewers determined ahead of publication that Facebook's experiment did
not fall under the government's human research protection program
because it was conducted for internal purposes.
"Adherence to the
Common Rule is PNAS policy, but as a private company, Facebook was under
no obligation to conform to the provisions of the Common Rule when it
collected the data used by the authors, and the Common Rule does not
preclude their use of the data," Verma said.
'Messed with minds '
PNAS's statement followed a formal complaint filed by privacy activists to US regulators seeking an urgent investigation.
In
its complaint to the US Federal Trade Commission, the Electronic
Privacy Information Center said the study which has been widely
criticized online deceived consumers and violated an agreement on
privacy settings.
"The company purposefully messed with people's minds," the complaint said.
It
said that Facebook's manipulation of users' news feeds to elicit
positive and negative emotional responses also "failed to follow
standard ethical protocols for human subject research."
The
complaint asked the US regulatory agency to investigate, to order a halt
to any similar practices and to require Facebook to make public its
algorithm used for the news feed.
An FTC spokesman declined to comment on the complaint.
The
privacy group, which joined other groups in complaints in 2009 and 2010
that led to Facebook's 20-year agreement with the FTC on privacy, said
that the huge social network did not get users' permission to conduct
the study and failed to notify participants that their data would be
disclosed to researchers.
The complaint came a day after British authorities announced an investigation over the Facebook experiment.
Facebook's
chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg apologized for communicating
"terribly" about the research and maintained that "we take privacy at
Facebook really seriously."
(Also see: Facebook Admits to 'Terrible' Communication Gaffe With Emotion Study)
The social network clandestinely
altered the emotional content of feeds of nearly 700,000 users, giving
some sadder news and others happier news in the 2012 study aimed at
better understanding "emotional contagion."
The research, published last month, prompted online anger and questions about the
ethics of the study, and put the world's most popular networking site on
the defensive.
A 2012 settlement with the FTC prohibits Facebook from misrepresenting the privacy or security of its data.
(Also see: Privacy Group Complains to FTC About Facebook Emotion Study)