Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

MNHQ

Heads up: some academic research taking place

664 replies

RowanMumsnet · 30/08/2018 16:53

Hello

Some researchers from a UK university are going to be collecting posts from some boards on Mumsnet over the next few weeks. They will be looking only at posts published from this point onwards. Selected posts will be anonymised (ie usernames will not be stored anywhere), and all processes will be GDPR-compliant.

EDITED BY MNHQ: to be clear, NO private or back-end data is being shared with the researchers and they will have NO access to any extra information about users. They will only be analysing published posts, ie things that are already in the public domain.

The researchers will analyse the text of the anonymised posts as part of their study. The full text of these anonymised posts will not be reproduced in the study - no pieces of text that make you or your situation identifiable will be published.

Once the study is complete, the database containing the anonymised posts will be destroyed.

Obviously we'd love to tell you what the study is about - but we can't because it will skew the results. However once the research has been completed we'll share it with you and you can read all about it. The academics running the study are people we've worked with before, and the topic is one we think lots of MN users will agree is interesting and useful.

IMPORTANT BIT: if you DO NOT want your posts to be considered for inclusion in the research, please shout here on this thread or email us on [email protected]

And of course let us know if you have any questions and we'll see if we can answer them.

Thanks

MNHQ

OP posts:
Monty27 · 31/08/2018 05:45

It's about privacy and being outed.
Will the final findings be published? Albeit anonymity will be respected where's the confidentiality? Transparency about the purpose would be helpful if not reassuring.

Ihavethepower · 31/08/2018 05:33

It's in site stuff...the board it should be on so it's not been hidden away.

I don't know why MN are even suggesting opt out. Are researchers really going to go through and cross reference with a list then check all that posters NCs?

I couldn't care less personally.

Monty27 · 31/08/2018 05:00

That's weird.
I think you should at least let us know what the research is hoping to find or analyse. It's getting a bit intrusive.

Graphista · 31/08/2018 04:51

Count me out. I do NOT consent to this. That includes ALL my usernames. I also DO NOT give you consent to tell them OR to indicate in any way that my usernames are linked! (eg by inc only my names on an opt out list to them). Shocking that I even feel the need to say that. Any GDPR experts about?

A - we should have been given more notice

B - mnhq should have made it more visible, I'm on mn a lot and this is the first time I've seen this

C - you're telling us nothing about how they're gathering the info or if you're giving them access to info that ISN'T publicly available

D - I too think it's unethical to have an opt out criteria when frankly it's doing the researchers a favour! Poor of mnhq not to know what the ethics committee know/have said.

E - the information is extremely scant we're being given no indication of the agenda. No indication if it involves 'fake' op's. No indication of who is funding the research/profiting from it.

F - it's a poor research tool imo I'm amazed their university is accepting this. It's lazy, poor practice!

G - "it'll all be deleted after the study" given that nothing held on a hard drive is EVER deleted, we're being given NO information regarding how the data will be stored or by whom I don't trust the data not to fall into the wrong hands!

SteamTrainsRealAleandOpenFires · 31/08/2018 04:32

Posting it hidden away like this smells of the plans being on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard".

I think you forgot about the stairs & the light btw. Wink

SteamTrainsRealAleandOpenFires · 31/08/2018 03:57

TO:- mountain ash.

EVEN MORE POSTERS ARE JOINING THE "OPT OUT"!. Grin

We (as in MNHQ) haven't sought a veto - we've worked with these researchers before (not on pieces of research, but we know their work and have collaborated on activities in their area of interest).

So mnhq decided to allow "these researchers" to trawl through our posts in the past without telling informing us!. So why inform us now?. Also which Uni is this?

So why haven't mnhq sought a veto (& in which sense of the meaning of "veto"), BTW you're going to get a load of "opt outs", which will skew-whiff (is this the right spelling?) results?, surely it would be US to DECIDE?

So how much cash were you lot given, for us to be used like lab vermin?

user1483387154 · 31/08/2018 03:48

Do not include any of my posts or comments

Somerville · 31/08/2018 01:42

I’m confused about why we’re being given a chance to opt-out. If they’re only using our public posts it’s not at all necessary. Confused

Is it to try to secure ethics approval because these academics will get extra behind the scenes information about posters, such as name changes? (If so then I don’t want to “take part” in this.)
I’m guessing it’s about breastfeeding language vs formula feeding language.

JoyTheUnicorn · 31/08/2018 01:16

I'd like to opt out please.

karyatide · 31/08/2018 01:13

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HavingALittleBabyToolshed · 31/08/2018 01:04

I’ve opted out already but want to make sure this includes all of my usernames, as I change regularly.

silentcrow · 31/08/2018 00:31

And you can count me out too. If I'm consenting to research I want to know who's doing the work and preferably who it's being funded by.

Posting it hidden away like this smells of the plans being on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard".

Shadowfax07 · 31/08/2018 00:19

I don't want any of my posts included.

Pythagonal · 31/08/2018 00:18

As I'm not a parent, please don't include any of my posts.

LEMtheoriginal · 30/08/2018 23:56

Not for me thank you

Actually feel a bit miffed as i rarely open sticky threads so might nit have seen this.

I think this information should be included on every thread or alternatively emailed to all members.

PutYourShirtOnMartin · 30/08/2018 23:55

Hmmm could this be doxxing using the front door....🤔

I don't give permission either

IdahoJones · 30/08/2018 23:53

I'll opt out, too, under this and previous user names, and including registration data, because I don't think it's possible to create good research when you don't know anything about the demographics, integrity or motives of the contributors from today onwards.

This announcement itself could precipitate a radical activist 'pile on'. THERE'S NO CONTROL GROUP FOR THAT.

Bad Science. Seriously.

FermatsTheorem · 30/08/2018 23:51

MNHQ, do you realise how difficult it is to truly anonymise information? Just stripping a username off a post does not anonymise the information - I've recognised friends in here by the information in their posts, not by their usernames. I don't believe you can tell posters in good faith that everything is anonymised.

www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/13/anonymous-browsing-data-medical-records-identity-privacy

Extract from the article below (makes me laugh in a black humour sort of way):

One of the earliest examples of this type of privacy violation occurred in 1996 when the Massachusetts Group Insurance Commission released “anonymised” data showing the hospital visits of state employees. As with the Australian data, the state removed obvious identifiers like name, address and social security number. Then the governor, William Weld, assured the public that patients’ privacy was protected.

Latanya Sweeney, a computer science grad who later became the chief technology officer at the Federal Trade Commission, showed how wrong Weld was by finding his medical records in the data set. Sweeney used Weld’s zip code and birth date, taken from voter rolls, and the knowledge that he had visited the hospital on a particular day after collapsing during a public ceremony, to track him down. She sent his medical records to his office.

FermatsTheorem · 30/08/2018 23:48

Similarly, I'd like to opt out. Also an academic. Also thinking it doesn't look ethical to me.

IdahoJones · 30/08/2018 23:47

I'm an academic and I can't identify a control group that would pass peer review.

NameChangedAgain18 · 30/08/2018 23:44

No thanks. Please count me out. I’m an academic and don’t consider this ethical at all.

DuckingGoodPJs · 30/08/2018 23:41

to find out how parents on Mumsnet talk about a particular parenting topic, using other topics on Mumsnet as a control group

I guess that won't be the overly restricted and overly moderated FWR as the control group then.

But I will opt out anyway.

BesmirchingMotherhood · 30/08/2018 23:40

Yep, opt me out please.

fanomoninon · 30/08/2018 23:38

Please exclude my posts, MHHQ

IdahoJones · 30/08/2018 23:36

One of the most influential, powerful and visible institutions upholding the gender binary is sport – where participation is predominantly segregated by biological sex, rooted in the widely-held beliefs about fairness and the biological advantages associated with being male. Such beliefs are over-simplistic, legitimise discrimination, and hinder the sports participation of transgender (intersex, trans, non-binary) individuals

Loughborough University.

Swipe left for the next trending thread