Printable View
Hi everybody,
I am a Master student at the School of Informatics (Lund University) and I am conducting a brief anonymous survey for the Master Thesis to study about user's privacy and risk taking on Social Networking Communities. If you could take five minutes to fill out the survey below, it would be invaluable help to me.
Here is a link to the survey:
http://bit.ly/risktaking
Thank you so much for your time! I really appreciate it.
I'll fill it in, but only if you promise to contribute to our community - and by that I mean help out - not just post one line responses :)
Sure, Steve!
done
done. strange last question.
Done, as with IBM, V strange last question.
*tootles off to do survey*
I said 25 :)
It's not strange question. He is trying to quantify how risk taking/adverse people feel/deal with online privacy. More risk adverse people will say a lower number for the last question and are probably share less info online because of the risk of identity fraud.
He should have left it a multiple choice question though, no real value by having an open answer.
Well it's more accurate this way though, he can just average it.
Websensed - sorry.
You ask about what information one includes on one's Facebook profile; but take no account of the fact that you can give different access to different people. For instance, I have all my info listed on there, but only a few people can see it all; most get a watered down version. How is one meant to take account of that in the survey with just the "Yes or No" answers you offer?
done.
Done, but again a bit miffed by the last question!
The last question made perfect sense. It's a measure of somebody's risk-tolerance. If you are 100% logical, you go for the 50% figure. Anything less than that is the measure of how much you value the "sure thing" over the risk of "losing out".
I don't entirely agree about it being "logical", because it depends where you're coming from. It is, however, clearly a sense of risk aversion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kata
50% would make sense, logically, if you were conducting a series of transactions, because over a big enough sample, they'd average out at that (excluding the chances of the coin landing on it's edge, or getting grabbed out the the sky by a passing falcon or UFO, or something).
But, if £30 is very important to you, then a guaranteed £30 might be far preferable to a 50% chance of £100, but a 50% chance of zero.
On the other hand, if £30 means not much, and if you start from the "I've got nothing now" attitude, then you're no worse off if you end up with nothing, so go for the bigger prize. That, after all, is the mentality of buying a lottery ticker by anyone that understands odds. You know, statistically, you aren't going to win the big ones and, long-term, you'll even get less back on the small ones than you put in. But someone wins a life-changing sum regularly, and it might be me. I'm not expecting it and if it happened, the shock might give me a heart attack, but nevertheless, I buy a ticket from time to time.
Why? Because, logically, the £1 it costs me means very little to me, so I'm prepared to have a punt if the mood catches me. I don't do it regularly, and I certainly don't expect to become a lottery millionaire. Yet I buy the occasional ticket.
The "logic" of how you'd decide on the coin-toss value, or on buying a lottery ticket, depends on value judgements about cost and prospective outcomes, so by definition is judgemental, not logical.
That's my view, anyway. :D
You make a fair semantic point - perhaps a better way for me to put it would be "looking at it from a purely mathematical point of view"!
Done, agree with the previous comments reagarding the ability to select who sees what on Facebook.
Kata, thank you for your participation. The access thing is also considered previously in the survey, but I think again that it would be difficult for people to remember the privacy settings they used in facebook, it will end up people just ticking the response conveniently and then would serve no purpose in the analysisQuote:
Originally Posted by Kata
So because I put £50 i am perceived as logical even though I didn't really get the question? lol :D
Ben
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunjiweb
No :mrgreen:
Edit: bah, yes you would, I forgot we started with 100, not 50!
Wrong again mate. "Looking at it from a risk neutral view" would be most accurate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kata
You would be perceived as risk neutral.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunjiweb
risk neutral eh?.... is that the same as risk averse? If so I'd probably agree!
The last question is quite interesting one and I hope I could find some interesting correlation with the overall risk perception towards social networks
There you go done it, I may have messed up your last question however because I answered honestly...
Thank you, Snail :)
Please re-read the above, and make sure I don't have to delete any more of your posts....Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve