Ipsos MORI and Demos call for better ethical standards in social media research in a new report published today, which finds just 38% of the public are aware their social media posts are potentially being analysed for research projects. The findings from a new online survey show public awareness that information on social media can be mined for research is low compared to other uses of social media data such as; to target advertising which 57% are aware of, and to personalise the content they see on that network (54%). The report #SocialEthics is the culmination of a year-long exploration of ethics in social media research and concludes with a series of recommendations to researchers, regulators and social media organisations on how they can raise awareness and improve ethical standards in this field. https://www.ipsos-mori.com/wisdomofthecrowd

1. 1
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Version 1 | Public
Wisdom of the Crowd
Attitudes and expectations towards social media data
and its uses
November 2015
17/11/15

2. 2
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
2
Wisdom of the Crowd
• The newly published report on social media research ethics is a part of the Wisdom of
the Crowd project, sponsored by Innovate UK, the UK’s innovation agency, with funding
contributions from the TSB, the EPSRC and the ESRC. Ipsos MORI, CASM Consulting
LLP, Demos and University of Sussex have collaborated in this project to critically
examine commercial possibilities for social media research.
• Three kinds of research were carried out with the public as part of the project:
− An online quantitative survey of 1,250 adults aged 16-75 in the UK asking about
people’s attitudes towards possible uses of their social media data, and specifically,
the value of social media research;
− Three qualitative workshops in which participants discussed use of social media
content, and the principles of ethical social media research (see full report for details).
− Statistical analysis (conjoint analysis) undertaken within the online survey cited
above, during which respondents were asked to imagine they were on an ethics board
and mark whether they would be likely to approve a series of social media research
projects with different features.
Further information about the project can be found here.

3. 3
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Survey results
As part of the Wisdom of the Crowd project,
an online survey was conducted to gauge
user expectations on a range of important
ethical issues in social media research.
Results are based on a total of online 1,250
interviews with adults aged 16-75 in Great
Britain. All interviews were completed online
between the 7 and 13 August 2015.

4. 4
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. Which of the following examples of using people’s social media data do you think
currently happen under the terms and conditions of social media sites?
Awareness of using social media data for the purpose
of research is currently quite low
6%
22%
38%
41%
46%
48%
54%
57%
None of these
Don’t know
Sharing individuals' social media data with third parties, such
as the government or companies, for research purposes
Sharing individuals' social media data with third parties, such
as the government or companies, for marketing purposes
Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third
parties, such as the government or companies, for research
purposes (but not linked to individuals)
Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third
parties, such as the government or companies, for marketing
purposes (but not linked to individuals)
Use of their social media data to personalise users’
experience of the social media site (for example the items
they see in their ‘feed’ or the content of emails or alerts)
Use of their social media data to help decide which adverts to
show users on the social media site
Combined introductions
Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015, participants were split and shown two different introductions, which are here combined (wording for introductions attached in
the appendix)
Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd

5. 5
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. And which, if any, do you think the following examples should not happen?
As well as low awareness, there is widespread disapproval
of sharing individual level social media data for research
9%
15%
31%
32%
33%
33%
60%
65%
None of these
Don’t know
Use of their social media data to help decide which adverts to
show users on the social media site
Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third
parties, such as the government or companies, for research
purposes (but not linked to individuals)
Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third
parties, such as the government or companies, for marketing
purposes (but not linked to individuals)
Use of their social media data to personalise users’
experience of the social media site (for example the items
they see in their ‘feed’ or the content of emails or alerts)
Sharing individuals' social media data with third parties, such
as the government or companies, for research purposes
Sharing individuals' social media data with third parties, such
as the government or companies, for marketing purposes
Combined introductions
Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the CrowdBase: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015, participants were split and shown two different introductions, which are here combined (wording
for introductions attached in the appendix)
Though nearly a third
disapprove of even de-
identified research

6. 6
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
9%
15%
31%
32%
33%
33%
60%
65%
6%
22%
57%
46%
48%
54%
38%
41%
None of these
Don’t know
Use of their social media data to help decide which adverts to
show users on the social media site
Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third
parties, such as the government or companies, for research
purposes (but not linked to individuals)
Sharing overall numbers of social media data with third
parties, such as the government or companies, for marketing
purposes (but not linked to individuals)
Use of their social media data to personalise users’
experience of the social media site (for example the items
they see in their ‘feed’ or the content of emails or alerts)
Sharing individuals social media data with third parties, such
as the government or companies, for research purposes
Sharing individuals social media data with third parties, such
as the government or companies, for marketing purposes
Combined introductions
Currently happens
Should not happen
Q. Which of the following examples of using people’s social media data do you think currently happen under the terms
and conditions of social media sites?
Q. And which, if any, do you think the following examples should not happen?
Activities that are thought to currently happen are generally
more accepted than the activities people think do not happen
Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd
Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015, participants were split and shown two different introductions, which are here combined (wording
for introductions attached in the appendix)

7. 7
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. Which of the following statements comes closest to your view on the publication of
social media posts?
Most would like their posts to remain anonymous, and feel
that all accounts should be treated the same in publication
58%
38%
16%
16%
10
15
6%
13%
4%
8%
6%
10%
Base: All social media users (1,121), All GB adults (1,250), 7-13th Aug 2015 Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd
A. If one of my social media
posts was used for research
and was selected to be
published, I would want to
remain anonymous so that
no one knew it was me
B. If one of my social media
posts was used for research
and was selected to be
published, I would like the
post to be attributed to me so
that people could see what I
said
A. All social media accounts
should be given the same
rights to anonymity when
used in social media
research, regardless of
whether the account is held
by a public institution, private
company or high profile
individual
B. Social media accounts held
by public institutions, private
companies and high profile
individuals should be treated
differently to accounts held by
members of the public, social
media research involving these
accounts should not be
anonymous
74%
54%
10%
21%

8. 8
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
3%
15%
32%
25%
20%
5%
Strongly agree Tend to agree Neither / nor Tend to disagree Strongly disagree Don't know
Q. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements:
Uncertainty about new technology that ‘derives’ personal
information from other given information on social media
Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015 Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd
“It is acceptable for a researcher to use computer programmes to estimate personal details about an
individual, such as gender or age, from other information such as their name, topics they have posted
about and so on”
18%
45%

9. 9
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Conjoint exercise
‘Conjoint analysis’ was conducted with the
public in order to identify the different
principles that are most important in
deciding whether a social media research
project would be likely to be approved by
members of the public. The objective of this
is to identify specific variables which prove
important for people making an ethical
decision about how their social media data
is used.
Please see full report for
technical details

10. 10
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale of
1 to 10, where 1 is ‘would definitely not approve’ and 10 is ‘definitely would approve’.
Across the 8 attributes tested, anonymity and extent to
which data is public are big drivers of ethical approval
17%
5%
3%
12%
22%4%
17%
20%
How anonymous is the
data?
Who is the project for?
Why are they doing the
project?
Who could be included?
Has permission been given?
Is the social media data publically
available?
What kind of content
would be looked at?
What personal information
would be used?
Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015. Percentages represent the relative importance of the attribute in driving approvability Source: Ipsos MORI, Wisdom of the Crowd

11. 11
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Q. How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale of
1 to 10, where 1 is ‘would definitely not approve’ and 10 is ‘definitely would approve’.
The emphasis of some attributes can be accounted for in
big differences between specific characteristics of projects
Source: Ipsos MORI,
Wisdom of the Crowd
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Who the project is for?
Government department
Public service/local councils
A charity
Researchers in universities
A private company
Is the social media data
publically available?
All types of public/private posts and
private messages
All types of public/private posts
Publically available posts, and posts
that can be seen by anyone with an
account
Posts that have already been made
public on a site where anyone can see
contributions
How anonymous is the data?
Individual level posts will be seen
individual social media posts will be
published unedited
Individual level posts will be seen by
researchers; individual social media
posts will be published anonymously
Individual level posts will be seen by
researchers, but posts will not be
published.
The researcher will not see
names/locations; no posts will be
published.
Only overall numbers are provided by
the social media site. No raw data will
be seen by the project.
Indexofrelativeimportance
indrivingapprovability
Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015. The utility scores for each level represent their importance, and a higher utility score means that the level is more likely to lead to the
hypothetical research project being ‘approved’. Within each attribute, the levels have been rescaled so that the least effective level within an attribute is given the value of zero.

12. 12
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale of 1
to 10, where 1 is ‘would definitely not approve’ and 10 is ‘definitely would approve’.
And in some cases a single important factor can make the
others seem less important (e.g. sensitive personal info)
Source: Ipsos MORI,
Wisdom of the Crowd
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
User IDs/profiles will be used to remove
fake users and accounts of institutions
Personal information may be
collected but will not be used
Only age will be used to remove posts from
those considered to be under 16
Age, gender and broad location
Sensitive personal information (for example,
sexuality and political affiliation) which is
relevant to the project
All those who have agreed to
the general terms and
conditions of the social media
site when then first signed up
All excluding those who have opted out of their data
being used for research generally
All excluding those who have
opted out of their data being
used for this specific project
Only those who have opted in to their data being
used for research generally when signing up to the
social media site
Only those who have opted in to
their data being used for this
specific project
Indexofrelativeimportance
indrivingapprovability
Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015. The utility scores for each level represent their importance, and a higher utility score means that the level is more likely to lead to the
hypothetical research project being ‘approved’. Within each attribute, the levels have been rescaled so that the least effective level within an attribute is given the value of zero.
Has permission been given?
What personal information
would be used?
As well as age, gender and broad
location, other information will be
used to help compare groups

13. 13
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
How likely, if at all, would you be to approve the following research project on a scale of 1
to 10, where 1 is ‘would definitely not approve’ and 10 is ‘definitely would approve’.
Even the least important of the variables overall have
important small distinctions within them
Source: Ipsos MORI,
Wisdom of the Crowd
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.20
What types of information
people need and are requesting
How and where services are being used
Health behaviours
Purchasing habits, or information on the
products or brands people like
To review or act on comments about a
product or service they deliver
To assess public opinion on an issue
To identify a group of people who
could benefit from a service/product
Anyone on social media who has been
identified as visiting a broad location
relevant to the project
Anyone who uses social media
Anyone on social media who has used
a word, hashtag or phrase relevant to
the project
Indexofrelativeimportanceindriving
approvability
Why are they doing the
project? Who could be included?
What kind of content
would be looked at?
Attitudes on a particular social issue
To identify a group of people who
could benefit from a service/product
Base: 1,250 GB adults, 7-13th Aug 2015. The utility scores for each level represent their importance, and a higher utility score means that the level is more likely to lead to the
hypothetical research project being ‘approved’. Within each attribute, the levels have been rescaled so that the least effective level within an attribute is given the value of zero.

14. 14
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
Appendix

15. 15
Version 1 | Public© Ipsos MORI
15
Introductions for currently happen/should not happen
questions
Source: Ipsos MORI
• INTRODUCTION 1 – ASKED OF HALF SAMPLE
“Before they can join a social media site users are asked to agree to terms and conditions,
these outline what they can do on the site and how the information they give will be used.
There are a number of different ways social media sites could use the information shared
by users on their platform. Data shared by users includes the attitudes, experiences,
behaviours and personal details they choose to publish on the site.”
• INTRODUCTION 2 – ASKED OF OTHER HALF OF SAMPLE
“Many social media platforms are free to use. In return for using the service for free, social
media sites make use of the data provided on the site by users.
Before they can join a social media site users are asked to agree to terms and conditions;
these outline what they can do on the site and how the information they give will be used.
There are a number of different ways social media sites could use the information shared
by users on their platform. Data shared by users includes the attitudes, experiences,
behaviours and personal details they choose to publish on the site.”