Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Guidance identifies risks of re-identification in data sharing, enhancing ethical practices for researchers.
if they include demographic information. In the present article, we provide researchers with broadly applicable guidance and tangible tools so that they can engage in open science practices without jeopardizing participants' privacy. Specifically, we (a) review current privacy standards, (b) describe computer science data protection frameworks and their adaptability to the social sciences, (c) provide practical guidance for assessing and addressing re-identification risk, (d) introduce two open-source algorithms developed for psychological scientists-MinBlur and MinBlurLite-to increase privacy while maintaining the integrity of open data, and (e) highlight aspects of ethical data sharing that require further attention. Ultimately, the risk of re-identification should not dissuade engagement with open science practices. Instead, technical innovations should be developed and harnessed so that science can be as open as possible to promote transparency and sharing and as closed as necessary to maintain privacy and security. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Morehouse et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: