Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
1
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Version 1 | Public
Wisdom of the Crowd
Attitudes and expectations towards social media da...
2
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
2
Wisdom of the Crowd
• The newly published report on social media research ethics is a p...
3
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Survey results
As part of the Wisdom of the Crowd project,
an online survey was conducted...
4
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. Which of the following examples of using people’s social media data do you think
curre...
5
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. And which, if any, do you think the following examples should not happen?
As well as l...
6
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
9%
15%
31%
32%
33%
33%
60%
65%
6%
22%
57%
46%
48%
54%
38%
41%
None of these
Don’t know
Us...
7
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. Which of the following statements comes closest to your view on the publication of
soc...
8
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
3%
15%
32%
25%
20%
5%
Strongly agree Tend to agree Neither / nor Tend to disagree Strongl...
9
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Conjoint exercise
‘Conjoint analysis’ was conducted with the
public in order to identify ...
10
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a sc...
11
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a sc...
12
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale...
13
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale...
14
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Appendix
15
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
15
Introductions for currently happen/should not happen
questions
Source: Ipsos MORI
• I...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Wisdom of the Crowd: Attitudes and expectations towards social media data and its uses

3,507 views

Published on

Ipsos MORI and Demos call for better ethical standards in social media research in a new report published today, which finds just 38% of the public are aware their social media posts are potentially being analysed for research projects.

The findings from a new online survey show public awareness that information on social media can be mined for research is low compared to other uses of social media data such as; to target advertising which 57% are aware of, and to personalise the content they see on that network (54%).

The report #SocialEthics is the culmination of a year-long exploration of ethics in social media research and concludes with a series of recommendations to researchers, regulators and social media organisations on how they can raise awareness and improve ethical standards in this field.

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/wisdomofthecrowd

Published in: Social Media
  • Be the first to comment

Wisdom of the Crowd: Attitudes and expectations towards social media data and its uses

  1. 1. 1 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI Version 1 | Public Wisdom of the Crowd Attitudes and expectations towards social media data and its uses November 2015 17/11/15
  2. 2. 2 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI 2 Wisdom of the Crowd • The newly published report on social media research ethics is a part of the Wisdom of the Crowd project, sponsored by Innovate UK, the UK’s innovation agency, with funding contributions from the TSB, the EPSRC and the ESRC. Ipsos MORI, CASM Consulting LLP, Demos and University of Sussex have collaborated in this project to critically examine commercial possibilities for social media research. • Three kinds of research were carried out with the public as part of the project: − An online quantitative survey of 1,250 adults aged 16-75 in the UK asking about people’s attitudes towards possible uses of their social media data, and specifically, the value of social media research; − Three qualitative workshops in which participants discussed use of social media content, and the principles of ethical social media research (see full report for details). − Statistical analysis (conjoint analysis) undertaken within the online survey cited above, during which respondents were asked to imagine they were on an ethics board and mark whether they would be likely to approve a series of social media research projects with different features. Further information about the project can be found here.
  3. 3. 3 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI Survey results As part of the Wisdom of the Crowd project, an online survey was conducted to gauge user expectations on a range of important ethical issues in social media research. Results are based on a total of online 1,250 interviews with adults aged 16-75 in Great Britain. All interviews were completed online between the 7 and 13 August 2015.
  4. 4. 4 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI Q. Which of the following examples of using people’s social media data do you think currently happen under the terms and conditions of social media sites? Awareness of using social media data for the purpose of research is currently quite low 6% 22% 38% 41% 46% 48% 54% 57% None of these Don’t know Sharing individuals' social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for research purposes Sharing individuals' social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for marketing purposes Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for research purposes (but not linked to individuals) Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for marketing purposes (but not linked to individuals) Use of their social media data to personalise users’ experience of the social media site (for example the items they see in their ‘feed’ or the content of emails or alerts) Use of their social media data to help decide which adverts to show users on the social media site Combined introductions Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015, participants were split and shown two different introductions, which are here combined (wording for introductions attached in the appendix) Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd
  5. 5. 5 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI Q. And which, if any, do you think the following examples should not happen? As well as low awareness, there is widespread disapproval of sharing individual level social media data for research 9% 15% 31% 32% 33% 33% 60% 65% None of these Don’t know Use of their social media data to help decide which adverts to show users on the social media site Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for research purposes (but not linked to individuals) Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for marketing purposes (but not linked to individuals) Use of their social media data to personalise users’ experience of the social media site (for example the items they see in their ‘feed’ or the content of emails or alerts) Sharing individuals' social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for research purposes Sharing individuals' social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for marketing purposes Combined introductions Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the CrowdBase: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015, participants were split and shown two different introductions, which are here combined (wording for introductions attached in the appendix) Though nearly a third disapprove of even de- identified research
  6. 6. 6 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI 9% 15% 31% 32% 33% 33% 60% 65% 6% 22% 57% 46% 48% 54% 38% 41% None of these Don’t know Use of their social media data to help decide which adverts to show users on the social media site Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for research purposes (but not linked to individuals) Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for marketing purposes (but not linked to individuals) Use of their social media data to personalise users’ experience of the social media site (for example the items they see in their ‘feed’ or the content of emails or alerts) Sharing individuals social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for research purposes Sharing individuals social media data with third parties, such as the government or companies, for marketing purposes Combined introductions Currently happens Should not happen Q. Which of the following examples of using people’s social media data do you think currently happen under the terms and conditions of social media sites? Q. And which, if any, do you think the following examples should not happen? Activities that are thought to currently happen are generally more accepted than the activities people think do not happen Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015, participants were split and shown two different introductions, which are here combined (wording for introductions attached in the appendix)
  7. 7. 7 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI Q. Which of the following statements comes closest to your view on the publication of social media posts? Most would like their posts to remain anonymous, and feel that all accounts should be treated the same in publication 58% 38% 16% 16% 10 15 6% 13% 4% 8% 6% 10% Base: All social media users (1,121), All GB adults (1,250), 7-13th Aug 2015 Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd A. If one of my social media posts was used for research and was selected to be published, I would want to remain anonymous so that no one knew it was me B. If one of my social media posts was used for research and was selected to be published, I would like the post to be attributed to me so that people could see what I said A. All social media accounts should be given the same rights to anonymity when used in social media research, regardless of whether the account is held by a public institution, private company or high profile individual B. Social media accounts held by public institutions, private companies and high profile individuals should be treated differently to accounts held by members of the public, social media research involving these accounts should not be anonymous 74% 54% 10% 21%
  8. 8. 8 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI 3% 15% 32% 25% 20% 5% Strongly agree Tend to agree Neither / nor Tend to disagree Strongly disagree Don't know Q. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements: Uncertainty about new technology that ‘derives’ personal information from other given information on social media Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015 Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd “It is acceptable for a researcher to use computer programmes to estimate personal details about an individual, such as gender or age, from other information such as their name, topics they have posted about and so on” 18% 45%
  9. 9. 9 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI Conjoint exercise ‘Conjoint analysis’ was conducted with the public in order to identify the different principles that are most important in deciding whether a social media research project would be likely to be approved by members of the public. The objective of this is to identify specific variables which prove important for people making an ethical decision about how their social media data is used. Please see full report for technical details
  10. 10. 10 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI Q. How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is ‘would definitely not approve’ and 10 is ‘definitely would approve’. Across the 8 attributes tested, anonymity and extent to which data is public are big drivers of ethical approval 17% 5% 3% 12% 22%4% 17% 20% How anonymous is the data? Who is the project for? Why are they doing the project? Who could be included? Has permission been given? Is the social media data publically available? What kind of content would be looked at? What personal information would be used? Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015. Percentages represent the relative importance of the attribute in driving approvability Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd
  11. 11. 11 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI Q. How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is ‘would definitely not approve’ and 10 is ‘definitely would approve’. The emphasis of some attributes can be accounted for in big differences between specific characteristics of projects Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Who the project is for? Government department Public service/local councils A charity Researchers in universities A private company Is the social media data publically available? All types of public/private posts and private messages All types of public/private posts Publically available posts, and posts that can be seen by anyone with an account Posts that have already been made public on a site where anyone can see contributions How anonymous is the data? Individual level posts will be seen individual social media posts will be published unedited Individual level posts will be seen by researchers; individual social media posts will be published anonymously Individual level posts will be seen by researchers, but posts will not be published. The researcher will not see names/locations; no posts will be published. Only overall numbers are provided by the social media site. No raw data will be seen by the project. Indexofrelativeimportance indrivingapprovability Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015. The utility scores for each level represent their importance, and a higher utility score means that the level is more likely to lead to the hypothetical research project being ‘approved’. Within each attribute, the levels have been rescaled so that the least effective level within an attribute is given the value of zero.
  12. 12. 12 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is ‘would definitely not approve’ and 10 is ‘definitely would approve’. And in some cases a single important factor can make the others seem less important (e.g. sensitive personal info) Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 User IDs/profiles will be used to remove fake users and accounts of institutions Personal information may be collected but will not be used Only age will be used to remove posts from those considered to be under 16 Age, gender and broad location Sensitive personal information (for example, sexuality and political affiliation) which is relevant to the project All those who have agreed to the general terms and conditions of the social media site when then first signed up All excluding those who have opted out of their data being used for research generally All excluding those who have opted out of their data being used for this specific project Only those who have opted in to their data being used for research generally when signing up to the social media site Only those who have opted in to their data being used for this specific project Indexofrelativeimportance indrivingapprovability Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015. The utility scores for each level represent their importance, and a higher utility score means that the level is more likely to lead to the hypothetical research project being ‘approved’. Within each attribute, the levels have been rescaled so that the least effective level within an attribute is given the value of zero. Has permission been given? What personal information would be used? As well as age, gender and broad location, other information will be used to help compare groups
  13. 13. 13 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is ‘would definitely not approve’ and 10 is ‘definitely would approve’. Even the least important of the variables overall have important small distinctions within them Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 What types of information people need and are requesting How and where services are being used Health behaviours Purchasing habits, or information on the products or brands people like To review or act on comments about a product or service they deliver To assess public opinion on an issue To identify a group of people who could benefit from a service/product Anyone on social media who has been identified as visiting a broad location relevant to the project Anyone who uses social media Anyone on social media who has used a word, hashtag or phrase relevant to the project Indexofrelativeimportanceindriving approvability Why are they doing the project? Who could be included? What kind of content would be looked at? Attitudes on a particular social issue To identify a group of people who could benefit from a service/product Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015. The utility scores for each level represent their importance, and a higher utility score means that the level is more likely to lead to the hypothetical research project being ‘approved’. Within each attribute, the levels have been rescaled so that the least effective level within an attribute is given the value of zero.
  14. 14. 14 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI Appendix
  15. 15. 15 Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI 15 Introductions for currently happen/should not happen questions Source: Ipsos MORI • INTRODUCTION 1 – ASKED OF HALF SAMPLE “Before they can join a social media site users are asked to agree to terms and conditions, these outline what they can do on the site and how the information they give will be used. There are a number of different ways social media sites could use the information shared by users on their platform. Data shared by users includes the attitudes, experiences, behaviours and personal details they choose to publish on the site.” • INTRODUCTION 2 – ASKED OF OTHER HALF OF SAMPLE “Many social media platforms are free to use. In return for using the service for free, social media sites make use of the data provided on the site by users. Before they can join a social media site users are asked to agree to terms and conditions; these outline what they can do on the site and how the information they give will be used. There are a number of different ways social media sites could use the information shared by users on their platform. Data shared by users includes the attitudes, experiences, behaviours and personal details they choose to publish on the site.”

×