Heads up: some academic research taking place

[RowanMumsnet]

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

Carnot yesterday on the feminism board some women were collating info on the transactivists who lobby publicly for changed to the laws affecting women and girls. No private info, all in the public domain. This was framed as a transphobic 'hitlist' and harassment. So, twisting of posts is what I expect to happen. No research takes place in a vacuum. I could analyse a thousand posts on mumsnet and prove anything I want to prove. Someone else could prove the opposite. The nature of sociological research is that it is conducted by people who bring their own prejudices to the desk, to the methodology, to the analysis. It's inescapable. You can confound for it, if you're genuine. If you aren't, you can twist anything any way you want. You can design a study to find what you want it to find.

Catbot not Carnot, my apols

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.

I post under two different usernames: are you going to be putting the posts of both my usernames together to give to the researchers?

Anyway, count me out.

I would like to opt out of this research. Thanks

Im fine with this, fuk it, I've got nothing to hide

is it this

I can't see any reason why the researchers would need to ask posters except as a courtesy, anyway. MN owns the copyright on our posts and it's all publicly offered information.

Have seen 'research' like this done on Twitter posts to give results like "46% of uses of the word 'cockwomble' were in conjunction with 'fucking', and 21% with 'utter'", assume that's the sort of thing we're talking about?

And for that reason, I'm struggling. I'm out please.

Do not use any of my posts under all my user names in this research.

do i have to opt out with every name change?

I mean it is fine, but it does suggest that you are handing name change data over. Which as we know, will get into the hands of potential doxxers.

Funding for FIVE PhDs in that, Charlie!
Glad someone's finally challenging that 'over-simplistic belief' that being male gives you an advantage in sport though

Count me out too. I don't consent to this.

Five! Didn't spot that. Sport is obviously the next Tra target, but they've realised people won't buy it without some research that looks 'sound'. Who's paying for that then.

If mn had asked before deciding on this research it may have been different. Accepting the matter then posting in site stuff instead off across the boards is murky to say the least.

So it'll be a no from me. You may not use my posts or data

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.

Please exclude my posts, MHHQ

Yep, opt me out please.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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.

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

I don't give permission either

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.