18 May 2012

Your day-to-day life in the ACT - Online survey with great prizes

| Lean_OBrien
Join the conversation
31

Want to win an iPad? Or a gift voucher? Or maybe just help out with research on Canberra?

An online survey about day-to-day life, health and wellbeing in the ACT will be open 16th-31st of May. It is funded by ACT Health and is being run by researchers at both The Australian National University and The University of Canberra. We are hoping to get a diverse range of people taking the survey so that we have a real picture of what people in the ACT do with their time, and how they feel about it.

Check it out: http://tinyurl.com/surveyact

The survey is open to all people over 18 in the ACT. It takes about 30 minutes and you can go into a draw to win one of these 46 great prizes:

3 Apple iPads (16GB, Wi-Fi, 4G)

8 $300 Canberra Centre vouchers

15 $200 Coles Myer gift cards

20 $100 Amazon.com vouchers

Surveycontact@anu.edu.au

Join the conversation

31
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

jadie360 said :

dungfungus said :

They are really crap prizes for anyone over 40.

Huh? Where did you get that idea? Ageism at it’s best.

The survey is supposed to cover “a diverse range of people”.
That includes pensioners with tin-foil hats, sonny-boy.

Well, at least it is not compulsory like this one.

But, I remain sceptical for a number of reasons- the information will probably be used to curb freedom and use coercion rather than persuasion on individual health/lifestyles choices (a la Nicola Roxon/preventative health style).

I know ANU/UC are not responsible for the results beyond their scope of research, but we’ve had a pretty bad run of late with the Mike Daube’s of the world.

Wow, what a long drawn out survey, but hey, I wouldn’t mind an Ipad

Dear Jivrashia,

Thanks!

(And, yes, I do think it’s worth the risk of participating – but, of course, it’s up to you!).

Helen.

Helen_Berry said :

The study builds on 14 years of research that I have personally done in this area, the collective years of research my immediate colleagues have done, and countless years of international research.

Yet very little research has attempted to understand how the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion actually work.

You have to laugh.

Helen_Berry said :

This body of research shows that people who participate in their communities tend to have (much) better health and wellbeing than those who do not. But who gets to participate and who gets to derive its benefits is profoundly and perniciously inequitably distributed. It’s a case of those who already have the most get the most. This might sound like it’s all upside for them. But it’s not. More often than not, these same people also contribute the most, working hard for their communities. Further, it’s not just a matter of rich vs poor, black vs white, male vs female and so on. It’s much more complex than that.

Of course, no-one wants to drag down tall poppies, or make the lives of those who are doing OK a misery, but it’s reasonable to want to improve the lives of those who have least. Yet very little research has attempted to understand how the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion actually work. Without this knowledge, governments, non-profit and other organisations, scientists and private citizens don’t have the information they need to make decisions about how to make things better for those who are marginalised, ill, in pain or otherwise suffering and rejected. That’s why we’re doing this study and that’s why we’re willing to ask people to help us by sharing their information – and to take a very small risk in doing so.

It would appear you have already decided what is wrong, applied teh usual academic political correctness, and are doing a survey into how to prove that your suppositions are right. I’m glad I gave up on it in that case.

Helen_Berry said :

Hello all. I’m Professor Helen Berry (UC)

Firstly, no I am not trying to make fun of Prof. Berry or trivialising her cause.
But that was a very long post from her so I just distilled it down to the essence of what the professor did say to the best of my knowledge, without the very lengthy supporting arguments.

TL;DR
-Survey is completely anonymous, except we will take your email for prize draw. But the prize draw system is separated from the survey system.
– We follow standards for maintaining privacy (data retention policy still unanswered?).
– I have been doing research on the topic related to this survey for 14 years, and it is very complex and it could do with your help.
– The goal is to equalise distribution of health benefits for the marginalised within our society.
– Your personal information is valuable to the cause.
– Trust me, it’s worth the risk to your privacy.

Sorry, but I did pick up on the last point being mentioned SEVERAL TIMES throughout the professor’s post.

Hello all. I’m Professor Helen Berry (UC), the senior researcher on this study. Thanks for the interest in the study – it’s really great to see people debating important issues in public. The ethics that surround health research (which this study is) are complex and we could talk about them for hours. My research group sometimes does.

Just so we’re all on the same page, health research in Australia is governed by ethical requirements established by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and administered by universities. The requirements for getting ethical approval for a study are exceptionally demanding. If you’d like to know more, the NHMRC website has details. The present study has received ethical approval by the ANU ethics committee under the NHMRC requirements, including with respect to advertising prizes and using the survey software Qualtrics. I know that this may not meet with everyone’s approval, but we have gone through this process properly and in good faith.

I realise participating in a survey takes a leap of trust on the part of the potential participant – which is why the survey is completely anonymous, confidential, voluntary and minimally intrusive, and why there are links to further information as well as contact numbers and email addresses for any concerns or queries. It’s also why Léan and I are willing to participate in online and other debate about the study. Survey participants and RiotACTers might be anonymous but the research team and universities aren’t.

In terms of privacy and confidentiality, if you have attempted the survey, you will have seen that we do not collect any identifying information unless a participant wants to enter the prize draw. If they do, we can’t avoid requesting some form of contact information. We have chosen email because it tends to be minimally- or non-identifying and is also a reliable way to reach people. Email addresses (which people only provide if they want to) are stored separately from their survey data and destroyed once the prizes have been distributed. Again, the prize-awarding process is governed by ethical and legal requirements to which there is a link on the survey website.

Stepping aside from the detail, it’s appropriate for me to make the point that all health research has to balance risk to participants against benefits to participants and the wider community. There is no situation of zero risk, whether we conduct research or not. If we do conduct research, there is always a risk, however small, that someone could be adversely affected. (Some of you have identified one such risk, which is the potential for exposure of private information.) Yet if we don’t conduct research, we cannot make advances in medicine. I think that is a much bigger risk.

The way scientific researchers tend to think about risk is to say: (i) on balance, medical research is of such great benefit to almost everyone that it is in the best interests of society to conduct it; and, (ii) because we recognise that this research could adversely affect participants, however minimally, we must have very strict rules about how it can be conducted. Most of us make these kinds of balanced judgements every day of our lives. For example, most of us have to go out to work, care for relatives or go grocery shopping. So most of us drive cars, knowing how dangerous it is to do so. Completing an online survey has nothing like that level of risk but, as I’ve said, it inevitably does have some.

So why take that risk? Without saying too much (which has the scientific risk of influencing how participants might answer the questions – another risk that must be weighed), this study is about the ways in which Canberrans participate in (or are excluded from) important facets of society (family, work/study, community), how they experience each, and how this is related to their wellbeing. The study builds on 14 years of research that I have personally done in this area, the collective years of research my immediate colleagues have done, and countless years of international research.

This body of research shows that people who participate in their communities tend to have (much) better health and wellbeing than those who do not. But who gets to participate and who gets to derive its benefits is profoundly and perniciously inequitably distributed. It’s a case of those who already have the most get the most. This might sound like it’s all upside for them. But it’s not. More often than not, these same people also contribute the most, working hard for their communities. Further, it’s not just a matter of rich vs poor, black vs white, male vs female and so on. It’s much more complex than that.

Of course, no-one wants to drag down tall poppies, or make the lives of those who are doing OK a misery, but it’s reasonable to want to improve the lives of those who have least. Yet very little research has attempted to understand how the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion actually work. Without this knowledge, governments, non-profit and other organisations, scientists and private citizens don’t have the information they need to make decisions about how to make things better for those who are marginalised, ill, in pain or otherwise suffering and rejected. That’s why we’re doing this study and that’s why we’re willing to ask people to help us by sharing their information – and to take a very small risk in doing so.

I tried to do the survey, spent 10-15 minutes on the first section, thought I was done and found there was 4 more to go.

I got bored and left.

dungfungus said :

If the prizes were more useful, tasteful and supported Canberra businesses 100% I would participate.
Why can’t ACT Health give “healthy” prizes like vouchers for F & V (real apples) at the Fyshwick Markets? There is nothing “healthy” about Apple iPods.

LOL. True.

dungfungus said :

They are really crap prizes for anyone over 40.

Huh? Where did you get that idea? Ageism at it’s best.

Myles Peterson12:43 am 21 May 12

Thanks, Lean.

You didn’t answer the question.

“What are the safeguards to ensure http://www.qualtrics.com/ deletes the information? Can you guarantee Qualtrics, or their employees, won’t misuse the information?”

Although this may be an academic matter for yourself and your colleagues, privacy is very important in the digital era. A breach can have many ramifications from an unexpected increase in health insurance, the refusal of credit, a failed job application through to identity theft.

“…this should be handled over email…”

No, it shouldn’t. It should be discussed publicly to highlight (or debunk) the risks involved.

They are really crap prizes for anyone over 40.

Now if one were nasty, one would join in the criticism of aspects of the survey to discourage people from entering, thus improving one’s chances of winning a prize, which one might feel one needs, having just bought a painting. (One is not saying that is the basis of others’ genuine worries by the way. Criminal genius is a rare thing.)

Fortunately, one is much too nice to put one’s evil plan into operation. I have no idea where all the ones are coming from, either. One is confusing one.

The survey is reasonably demanding. (That’s true, not evil.)

ANU Ethics is aware that we are using Qualtrics. It is the preferred online survey tool of choice for the ANU, the University of Canberra and many others including Monash, Deakin, Wollongong and Sydney University. Qualtrics has a very good ethical reputation in academic circles, but if anyone wants more information & has more specific concerns, this should be handled over email – surveycontact@anu.edu.au.

I think these concerns should be run past the ANU Ethics committee. Lean, will you go back to step one and get confirmation, and post it to the survey before many more people complete it? Or will a Rioter need to raise with ANU the apparent lack of a guarantee for Australian users in this survey, through the careless use of what could well be a “free survey” dataminer?

Here is Qualtrics’s “guarantee”:
“Qualtrics complies with the U.S. and E.U. Safe Harbor Framework and the U.S.and Swiss Safe Harbor Framework as set forth by the U.S. Department of Commerce regarding the collection, use and retention of personal information from European Union member countries and Switzerland.”

Er, just how does this guarantee privacy for Australian users?

Myles Peterson10:28 am 20 May 12

Cheers for the responses, Lean. You haven’t addressed the issue I raised.

What are the safeguards to ensure http://www.qualtrics.com/ deletes the information? Can you guarantee Qualtrics, or their employees, won’t misuse the information?

You’re not the only Canberra outfit to use prizes to entice people to give up private details to off-shore outfits. One unconscionable mob are targeting children. I’m a bit surprised the ANU ethics committee would allow this.

Would you consider using in-house run survey tools rather than foreign companies? I’d be happy to help research some open source solutions and/or we can ask our friendly Riot-Act community for help.

At the end of the survey, there is an option to go into the prize draw. People who select this option are then asked to provide some sort of contact details. Astrojax, if something went wrong for you could you send a description of what happened directly to surveycontact@anu.edu.au?

…and how do you know who i am or how to contact me to alert me to my prize, should i be selected? the thing just finished and said thanks for completing… is it stalking me?

wildturkeycanoe5:37 pm 19 May 12

Totally lame survey, in terms of privacy etc. Just do it folks, nothing to fear, it’s easy as never…rarely…sometimes….often….always…..

Lean_OBrien said :

We are using standard practice to protect people’s privacy as advised, monitored, and approved by the ANU, and in line with the NHMRC National Guidelines on research. More details are provided in the information sheet on the front page of the survey itself.

I don’t wish to carp, but your front page only refers to a “detailed information sheet”. To be fully in keeping with the guidelines your link should be labelled explicitly on that front page to privacy info. Preferably a link to just the privacy info. I appreciate that you may not be being deliberately dishonest, but you aren’t exhibiting best practice here.

We are using standard practice to protect people’s privacy as advised, monitored, and approved by the ANU, and in line with the NHMRC National Guidelines on research. More details are provided in the information sheet on the front page of the survey itself.

Lean_OBrien said :

One more thing: You do NOT get bumped from the draw for being connected to ANU, University of Canberra and/or ACT Health. It’s just to get an idea of the participant demographics.

You haven’t clarified the privacy issue, sorry. UC and ANU both have stringent privacy declaration policies regarding surveys. An ethics committee may have cleared this process, but they will have assumed you will post the privacy information appropriately. Sorry, but this makes you look unprofessional and I’m surprised you are getting away with it!

One more thing: You do NOT get bumped from the draw for being connected to ANU, University of Canberra and/or ACT Health. It’s just to get an idea of the participant demographics.

HI guys, thanks for your comments. A few responses:

Myles Peterson: It’s an important issue and I-filed is right: our research has been reviewed and approved by an ANU ethics committee. Only two researchers at the ANU have access to the data & to the contact list. Once the prize draw is completed the list will be deleted. The prize draw is conducted by a third party – it’s all above board and covered in the terms & conditions and information sheets linked on the survey page.

I-filed: So far this is not happening. I wasn’t sure what would happen, but so far the vast majority of people are doing the whole thing and many are giving considered responses in the open comment boxes too.

Dungfungus: In fairness to ACT Health, I selected the prizes.

Ben_Dover: Thanks anyway for giving it a go.

Solidarity: Ha! I laughed out loud at this.

Myles Peterson said :

What are the privacy safeguards?

Would be handy to know when enticing people into giving their personal details to some mob in Utah.

Good point. I would think this contravenes ANU policies.

Myles Peterson6:14 pm 18 May 12

What are the privacy safeguards?

Would be handy to know when enticing people into giving their personal details to some mob in Utah.

Um what makes you think people won’t race through the survey just to enter the draw? (And don’t say it’s because of the “trick/check” questions – they’re easily spotted and made correct.) I would say at least half your respondents will do just that.

I’m assuming that people who tick that they are associated with ANU and ACT Health get bumped out of the draw. Would be good to let people know in advance!

If the prizes were more useful, tasteful and supported Canberra businesses 100% I would participate.
Why can’t ACT Health give “healthy” prizes like vouchers for F & V (real apples) at the Fyshwick Markets? There is nothing “healthy” about Apple iPods.

Started it, got halfway through, got bored, dropped out.

I am posting on the RiotACT

…and this suits me well.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.