step 3.2parison between Profiles which have Pets and you will Profiles as opposed to Pets

step 3.2parison between Profiles which have Pets and you will Profiles as opposed to Pets

Socio-demographic analysis and you can amount of character photos showed for everybody analysed users (letter = 2400) and you may individually having Vienna (n = 1200) and you will Tokyo (letter = 1200).

Of the 2400 investigated profiles, 373 (15.5%) displayed at least one animal photo. In both cities, we found a positive correlation between the number of profile photos and the number of profile photos showing animals (Vienna: rs = 0.184; p = 0.008 | Tokyo: rs = 0.206; p = 0.009).

Comparison of the users who displayed animal photos on their profile and equestriansingles the users who did not do so resulted in the following significant differences (see Dining table 5 ). On the selected analysed dating app, significantly more women than men (p = 0.049) present animal photos on their profiles. Further, significantly more users in Vienna (p = 0.006), and significantly more older users (p = 0.019), have profiles with animal photos as compared with users in Tokyo and younger users. In addition, users who display an animal photo on their profile post, on average, display one more photo than users who do not do so (p < 0.001). No significant differences between heterosexual and homosexual users of the analysed app were identified (p = 0.639) (see Table 5 ).

Table 5

Socio-demographic studies and you can quantity of character photographs showed for everyone profiles having animals (n = 373) and you will profiles instead pets (n = 2027).

step three.step 3. Prevalence and you may Classification regarding Dogs Exhibited into Profiles

A further reason for the research would be to regulate how of several profiles shown dogs and you will what kinds of animal had been shown. In general, even more profiles inside the Vienna (211; 17.6%) inform you pets to their reputation than just profiles when you look at the Tokyo (162; 13.5%) (? 2 (1) = seven.622; p = 0.006). All pages-we.e., 77.7% into the Vienna and you can 76.5% when you look at the Tokyo-presented your pet, otherwise pet, with the a single profile photos. Into the a smaller proportion out of circumstances-we.e., twenty-two.3% within the Vienna and 23.5% for the Tokyo-the fresh new pages had several photos demonstrating your pet, otherwise animals, inside their profile.

step 3.step 3.1. Presentation from Pet in the first Character Photo

Of your 373 pages deciding to were creature pictures, 73 (19.6%) displayed the brand new animals on the very first character pictures. Here, investigations from pages inside the Vienna and Tokyo shown high differences since the 65.9% users in the Vienna showed your pet dog on the very first pictures while the in contrast to 29.3% out-of users for the Tokyo (? 2 (1) = 8.610, p = 0.003). On top of that, just pages in Vienna (12.2%) have shown ranch pets on the earliest profile photos. That it triggered a distinction to profiles when you look at the Tokyo (? 2 (1) = 4.189, p = 0.041). We in addition to found that a whole lot more pages into the Tokyo exhibited kitties (40.6%) and unique animals (15.6%) within their basic reputation photos than simply users inside the Vienna (kitties = 2.4%; amazing dogs = 0.0%) (cats: ? 2 (1) = seven.819, p = 0.005; exotic animals: ? 2 (1) = six.877, p = 0.009).

step three.step 3.2. Speech from Dogs throughout Reputation Photo (Including the Earliest Profile Photo)

Figure 1 shows the percentages of various animal species shown on the analysed profiles. Again, comparison between the profiles in Vienna and Tokyo revealed significant differences here. Users in Tokyo were significantly more likely to show cats (35.8%) and small animals (6.8%) than users in Vienna (cats = 18.0%; small animals = 0.0%) (cats: ? 2 (1) = , p < 0.001; small animals: ? 2 (1) = , p < 0.001). The Viennese profiles included farm animal (10.9%) and horse (7.1%) photos significantly more often than the profiles in Tokyo (farm animals = 0.6%; horses = 1.2%) (farm animals: ? 2 (1) = , p < 0.001; horses: ? 2 (1) = 7.270, p = 0.007) (see Figure 1 ).

Geef een antwoord

Het e-mailadres wordt niet gepubliceerd.