Framing Effects on Willingness to Participate in Geolocation-Based Research

IF 2.4 4区 管理学 Q3 BUSINESS International Journal of Market Research Pub Date : 2023-04-11 DOI:10.1177/14707853231170107
Carlos Ochoa, M. Revilla
{"title":"Framing Effects on Willingness to Participate in Geolocation-Based Research","authors":"Carlos Ochoa, M. Revilla","doi":"10.1177/14707853231170107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Internet’s widespread adoption and recent technological developments have provided researchers with the opportunity to capture new data types (e.g., images, passively collected data), which offer several advantages over conventional survey data. Nevertheless, the limited participation rate in projects requiring to share such data may limit their benefits, and even their feasibility. To estimate the willingness to participate in such projects in advance, researchers frequently rely on surveys. However, the way researchers describe what data should be shared and how, and the phrasing of questions asked to participants to obtain their agreement may result in different estimates. This study presents the results of a conjoint experiment that estimates the hypothetical willingness of participants to engage in two research activities that require sharing geolocation data. Three different descriptions of the activities were presented to participants: a neutral one, one emphasizing the necessity to commit to participate, and one emphasizing safe handling of shared data. The three descriptions elicited different levels of willingness, with a maximum effect of 7.0 percentage points (statistically significant). Additionally, the importance given by participants to the attributes of the activities (e.g., project duration or incentives) differed depending on the description. Notably, the description that emphasized data safety produced lower levels of willingness compared to the neutral one. This suggests that researchers should avoid overly emphasizing safety assurances when requesting the sharing of sensitive data, beyond the necessary information required for obtaining informed consent from participants.","PeriodicalId":47641,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Market Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Market Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853231170107","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Internet’s widespread adoption and recent technological developments have provided researchers with the opportunity to capture new data types (e.g., images, passively collected data), which offer several advantages over conventional survey data. Nevertheless, the limited participation rate in projects requiring to share such data may limit their benefits, and even their feasibility. To estimate the willingness to participate in such projects in advance, researchers frequently rely on surveys. However, the way researchers describe what data should be shared and how, and the phrasing of questions asked to participants to obtain their agreement may result in different estimates. This study presents the results of a conjoint experiment that estimates the hypothetical willingness of participants to engage in two research activities that require sharing geolocation data. Three different descriptions of the activities were presented to participants: a neutral one, one emphasizing the necessity to commit to participate, and one emphasizing safe handling of shared data. The three descriptions elicited different levels of willingness, with a maximum effect of 7.0 percentage points (statistically significant). Additionally, the importance given by participants to the attributes of the activities (e.g., project duration or incentives) differed depending on the description. Notably, the description that emphasized data safety produced lower levels of willingness compared to the neutral one. This suggests that researchers should avoid overly emphasizing safety assurances when requesting the sharing of sensitive data, beyond the necessary information required for obtaining informed consent from participants.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
框架对参与基于地理位置的研究意愿的影响
互联网的广泛采用和最近的技术发展为研究人员提供了捕捉新数据类型(例如,图像、被动收集的数据)的机会,与传统调查数据相比,这提供了一些优势。然而,在需要共享此类数据的项目中,参与率有限可能会限制其效益,甚至限制其可行性。为了提前估计参与此类项目的意愿,研究人员经常依靠调查。然而,研究人员描述应该共享哪些数据以及如何共享,以及向参与者提出问题以获得同意的措辞,可能会导致不同的估计。这项研究展示了一项联合实验的结果,该实验估计了参与者参与两项需要共享地理位置数据的研究活动的假设意愿。向与会者介绍了对这些活动的三种不同描述:一种是中立的,一种强调承诺参与的必要性,另一种强调安全处理共享数据。这三种描述引发了不同程度的意愿,最大影响为7.0个百分点(具有统计学意义)。此外,参与者对活动属性(如项目持续时间或激励措施)的重视程度因描述而异。值得注意的是,与中性描述相比,强调数据安全的描述产生了较低的意愿水平。这表明,除了获得参与者知情同意所需的必要信息外,研究人员在要求共享敏感数据时应避免过度强调安全保证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Market Research is the essential professional aid for users and providers of market research. IJMR will help you to: KEEP abreast of cutting-edge developments APPLY new research approaches to your business UNDERSTAND new tools and techniques LEARN from the world’s leading research thinkers STAY at the forefront of your profession
期刊最新文献
Examining stated improvement research methods Marketing Outcomes and Shareholder Value: A Review and Research Agenda Measuring prime ministerial brands: Exploring Needham’s framework for assessing the UK’s Boris Johnson and the Greek konstantinos mitsotakis Machine learning based methods for ratemaking health care insurance When “the more the better”? Mindfulness enhances the effect of the number of displayed product features in short video ADs on purchase intention
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1