InterLink Headline News 2.0 - Interlink Headline News No. 7262 Sunday December 21, 2014
A group of professors and American researchers published a report in 2012. Entitled A 61-Million-Person Experiment in Social Influence, detailing the November 2, 2010, a nonrandomized trial of all users involved was Facebook for more 18 years. Users were randomized to a group of "social messages," a group of "informational messages" and a control group. The first two groups pakmail received a message at the top of their news feeds encouraging them to vote.
The group of social messages also had the opportunity to click on the button "I voted" and see a selection of profile pictures from friends who had also voted. Click on that button enabled researchers to "measure political self-expression," pakmail which is likely to have been more affected by the degree pakmail to which a user wants to be seen as a voter for others.
It matching these 6.3 million users voter registrations (publicly available) allowed researchers argue that "seeing the faces of friends contributed significantly to the overall effect of the message on voting in the real world." People want to be seen.
The results suggest that the social message of Facebook increased pakmail direct participation by 60,000 voters, and indirectly through social contagion from other 280,000 voters. The conclusion of the unusual, pakmail unexpected and controversial experiment was more than 0.60 percent growth in participation per capita between 2006 and 2010 may have been caused by a single message on Facebook. pakmail "How far can (or should ) come up with these little games? The initiative induction pakmail social contagion aimed at changing the political behavior of a huge number pakmail of people, but says nothing about the content of the vote: Also it can be manipulated?
You have to ask Harry specialist UX (user experience) by darkpatterns.org website that alerts consumers to the tricks of digital sleight of innumerable sites used to defraud inducing visitors to buy Brignull pakmail what not want and tricks on.
Brignull has more than clear that the Internet is (how could not realize after use (or rather use for it) for almost 25 years?) "A major experiment in applied psychology." pakmail Something has been happening continuously since 2000 (thanks to broadband) and especially without knowing that we are operating as digital lab rats.
The basis of this technique pakmail customizations are testing A / B, The A / B Test: Inside pakmail the Technology That's pakmail Changing the Rules of Business, ie websites that serve different versions of your pages randomly searching for that ls users privilege.
There is nothing new since from 1967 Ogilvy & Mather promoted the design of different ads according to different audiences looking for that caused greater responses. But what was once toward a minority pakmail level today has huge factories to replicate indefinitely and even wonders as the Huffington Post proves every morning with their owners as.
Obama to us all round Dan Siroker, CEO and cofounder of Optimizely showed that the testing A / B that serve businesses operate in politics with a striking and dangerous accuracy. In what was to convert the website browser Obama to step into a serial subscriber was. Everything was on hand to choose pakmail what one most liked and with great success. In 2008 4000000 email addresses were added to 100 million dollars in funding
Advertisers (and lawyers) who has an answer for everything instead of pointing to deception that these strategies pakmail involve the justified in terms of experimental evolution and evolutionary pakmail strategies. If biology plays with our genes us why we could or should do the same with memes.?
Each has driven much of disbelief, accusations of malpractice and questioning the sale of clicks to advertisers is seen by these opportunists as mutual consent. For thus prefer to see. We create worthwhile to let us use the platforms for free in return for this spying consented do you convert pakmail these initiatives valid and legitimate? Does the complicity consent or grievance? Should we rejoice that an algorithm decides (instead of judgment or discretion) that news we see our friends?
There is much more to comment on these matters but what is clear is that as the network connects
A group of professors and American researchers published a report in 2012. Entitled A 61-Million-Person Experiment in Social Influence, detailing the November 2, 2010, a nonrandomized trial of all users involved was Facebook for more 18 years. Users were randomized to a group of "social messages," a group of "informational messages" and a control group. The first two groups pakmail received a message at the top of their news feeds encouraging them to vote.
The group of social messages also had the opportunity to click on the button "I voted" and see a selection of profile pictures from friends who had also voted. Click on that button enabled researchers to "measure political self-expression," pakmail which is likely to have been more affected by the degree pakmail to which a user wants to be seen as a voter for others.
It matching these 6.3 million users voter registrations (publicly available) allowed researchers argue that "seeing the faces of friends contributed significantly to the overall effect of the message on voting in the real world." People want to be seen.
The results suggest that the social message of Facebook increased pakmail direct participation by 60,000 voters, and indirectly through social contagion from other 280,000 voters. The conclusion of the unusual, pakmail unexpected and controversial experiment was more than 0.60 percent growth in participation per capita between 2006 and 2010 may have been caused by a single message on Facebook. pakmail "How far can (or should ) come up with these little games? The initiative induction pakmail social contagion aimed at changing the political behavior of a huge number pakmail of people, but says nothing about the content of the vote: Also it can be manipulated?
You have to ask Harry specialist UX (user experience) by darkpatterns.org website that alerts consumers to the tricks of digital sleight of innumerable sites used to defraud inducing visitors to buy Brignull pakmail what not want and tricks on.
Brignull has more than clear that the Internet is (how could not realize after use (or rather use for it) for almost 25 years?) "A major experiment in applied psychology." pakmail Something has been happening continuously since 2000 (thanks to broadband) and especially without knowing that we are operating as digital lab rats.
The basis of this technique pakmail customizations are testing A / B, The A / B Test: Inside pakmail the Technology That's pakmail Changing the Rules of Business, ie websites that serve different versions of your pages randomly searching for that ls users privilege.
There is nothing new since from 1967 Ogilvy & Mather promoted the design of different ads according to different audiences looking for that caused greater responses. But what was once toward a minority pakmail level today has huge factories to replicate indefinitely and even wonders as the Huffington Post proves every morning with their owners as.
Obama to us all round Dan Siroker, CEO and cofounder of Optimizely showed that the testing A / B that serve businesses operate in politics with a striking and dangerous accuracy. In what was to convert the website browser Obama to step into a serial subscriber was. Everything was on hand to choose pakmail what one most liked and with great success. In 2008 4000000 email addresses were added to 100 million dollars in funding
Advertisers (and lawyers) who has an answer for everything instead of pointing to deception that these strategies pakmail involve the justified in terms of experimental evolution and evolutionary pakmail strategies. If biology plays with our genes us why we could or should do the same with memes.?
Each has driven much of disbelief, accusations of malpractice and questioning the sale of clicks to advertisers is seen by these opportunists as mutual consent. For thus prefer to see. We create worthwhile to let us use the platforms for free in return for this spying consented do you convert pakmail these initiatives valid and legitimate? Does the complicity consent or grievance? Should we rejoice that an algorithm decides (instead of judgment or discretion) that news we see our friends?
There is much more to comment on these matters but what is clear is that as the network connects
No comments:
Post a Comment