Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Confidentiality and spatially explicit data: concerns and challenges.

Leah K VanWey1, Ronald R Rindfuss, Myron P Gutmann

  • 1Department of Sociology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA. lvanwey@indiana.edu

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
|October 19, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

How representative are electronic health records? A record linkage study using individual-level census data.

Social science & medicine (1982)·2026
Same author

Accelerating real-world prediction and research in Alzheimer's: The M3AD study.

Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association·2026
Same author

Evaluating Redundancy and Biases in EHR Social Determinants of Health Data Screening.

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences·2026
Same author

Caring for Communities: Comparing Health Care System Patient Populations to Regional Populations.

Journal of general internal medicine·2025
Same author

Race and Ethnicity Data in the Electronic Health Records: New Insights Through Comparison with American Community Survey Microdata.

Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities·2025
Same author

Assessing Electronic Health Records for Describing Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities: A Research Note.

Demography·2024

Protecting respondent confidentiality in spatial social science research is challenging. Current data sharing and mapping practices conflict with ethical data protection, necessitating further research for balanced solutions.

Area of Science:

  • Spatial Sciences
  • Social Sciences
  • Geospatial Data Analysis

Background:

  • Advances in spatial sciences offer new avenues for social science research on context and behavior.
  • Existing research communities have not adequately addressed confidentiality threats in spatial social survey and census data.
  • Ethical data practices are crucial for maintaining public trust and scientific integrity.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To present four key principles for ethical and high-quality science using spatially explicit data: confidentiality protection, social-spatial linkage, data sharing, and data preservation.
  • To analyze the conflicts between these principles, particularly concerning data visualization (maps) and data sharing.
  • To evaluate current practices in mapping and data sharing and their impact on resolving these conflicts.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Methods:

  • Review of current practices in displaying spatially explicit data through maps.
  • Analysis of data sharing methods, including modified or incomplete datasets and data enclaves.
  • Examination of the interplay between mapping, data sharing, and respondent confidentiality.

Main Results:

  • Current practices often prioritize one principle (e.g., data sharing or display) over others, failing to adequately resolve conflicts.
  • Maps, while essential for results display, can inadvertently increase risks to respondent confidentiality when combined with shared data files.
  • Existing data sharing methods like modified datasets or data enclaves present limitations for both scientific advancement and confidentiality protection.

Conclusions:

  • A fundamental conflict exists between advancing science through data sharing/display and protecting respondent confidentiality in spatial data.
  • Current practices are insufficient for satisfactorily balancing these competing principles.
  • Further research and open dialogue are essential to develop effective solutions for ethical and high-quality spatial social science research.