on 8/30/02 1:26 PM, Gary Moody at gmoody_at_gmx.net wrote:
> I think that the negative reaction some are having, myself included, with
> the results of your study have more to do with the fact that we, as a group,
> were being studied for the purpose of publication *without* our explicit
> knowledge or permission than with your specific observations/conclusions.
>
> Although our listserv is a semi-public forum for assistance and discussion
> of the Newton, there is a considerable amount of discussion of off-topic
> issues that is generally considered to be "among friends". A large core of
> the participants have been in attendance for years, and are very familiar
> ("friends") with other group members, both new and old. And, generally,
> "friends" do not compile these types of discussions for statistical or
> psychological analysis, particularly for publication. Friends tend to
> accept them at face value and move on to the next topic, whatever that may
> be. The list members tend to think of these discussions as internal to the
> group.
Hmmm... that whole "expectation of privacy" matter. Just goes to show that
happiness/unhappiness is about the degree to which the world matches up with
our personal expectations (which are within our control, BTW). Personally,
I have no expectation of privacy when using a list that anyone & their
brother can sign up for and simply 'lurk' for however long they choose.
There are 1500 signed up but yet only a few dozen very regular posters to
this list. Sure, some signed up and may never really read the list, but
it's a certainty that there are hundreds of lurkers reading this very
message. I'm aware that I could type something unfortunate that could
easily be copied w/o my knowledge and later reach up and bite me. But I'm
certainly NOT irritated with those hundreds of lurkers because of this.
>
> Therefore, the reaction to discovering that we are "being observed",
> measuring our "consumer behaviors/modalities", and this is to be the subject
> of an academic publication that is cited in the commercial media...well...to
> say that I feel somewhat violated is an understatement. I think that the
> collective consciousness that someone might be in the background measuring
> our responses will color future interaction in this forum in a negative way,
> a sad development.
Ummm... sorry to disappoint you, but the background measuring of responses
is (and has been, for a long time) ongoing. Many websites you click, every
warranty card you return, every time you swipe your credit card in a store,
the list is endless. At least in this case, the info gathered isn't
individual and is being used academically as compared to commercially.
>
> Had you been up-front and announced to the group your intentions, and the
> time-frame for your study, this might have been avoided, but...
Except, of course, knowledge of being observed tends to change the very
behavior that it is desired to observe. When the guests are coming, we
clean our house; when the general is coming, spit and polish are applied;
when Jane Goodall shows up, the chimps put away their TVs and Black & Decker
equipment and fashion things of twigs... I expect that the discussion on
this very topic is different than it might otherwise have been, simply by
virtue of the authors' participation.
- Eric.
--Eric Strobel (fyzycyst_at_NOSPAM^mailaps.org)
===================================================================== The odds are greatly against you being immensely smarter than everyone else in the field. If your analysis says your terminal velocity is twice the speed of light, you may have invented warp drive, but the chances are a lot better that you've screwed up. =====================================================================
-- Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Read the Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/ This is the NewtonTalk mailing list - http://www.newtontalk.net/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Sep 05 2002 - 10:05:56 EDT