[OSM-talk] Report on the OSMF 2021 Survey after One Week

Sun Jan 24 16:39:57 UTC 2021

It is based on the honor system. and yes it could be fixed but at what cost $.

>Sunday, January 24, 2021 10:33 AM -06:00 from Darafei Praliaskouski via talk <talk at openstreetmap.org>:
> 
>Hello,
> 
>The survey is not protected from multi voting in any way.   
>нд, 24 сту 2021, 17:19 карыстальнік Allan Mustard < allan.mustard at osmfoundation.org > напісаў:
>>>What are assumptions for that? Because given inherently biased samples (biased in way
>>>not allowing for balancing/adjusting - survey is made because demographics are unknown!),
>>>I am pretty sure that it is misleading to include such statistics.
>>>
>>>We do not know how strong bias, even type of it and we can only guess how sample
>>>of survey-takers is biased compared to general community (and there is tradictional
>>>problem of people trying to manipulate survey by taking it multiple times,
>>>strategic refusal to answer some questions about demographics or just lying).
>>>
>>>For example if some group is overrepresented or underrepresented compared to
>>>demographic of OSM mappers this survey is unable to detect it!  
>>>
>>>In real situation even with 5 000 people answering it is likely that 
>>>real confidence interval may be 20% or 10% of 1% - and we do not know
>>>which one would be correct! 
>>Mateusz, et al,
>>
>>Our first assumption is that disseminating information through a multitude of communications channels will reach a much less biased sample than if we were only to announce the survey via the talk lists.  This is why the Board is spreading the word about the survey via social media plus direct emailing to user groups, to local chapters and communities, to working groups, via WeeklyOSM, the website, and the wiki calendar, and is asking all who read these announcements to propagate them farther via any and all channels at their disposal.  It is why the Board has had the survey translated from original English into 15 other languages (so far), the largest effort to translate an OSMF survey to date.[1]  It is also the rationale behind running the survey for nearly one month, which is an unusually long duration for a survey.  Local communities have advised us that a month is needed to disseminate information of this nature, particularly in regions with difficult Internet access.  At present we are averaging over 250 responses per day to the survey.
>>Second, when the data are in, we plan to attempt to normalize the survey data with known quantifiable data on mapping activity, such as data from OSMstat.[2]  This will help address geographic biases in the sample.  The major reason we have asked for demographic data is to assess bias in the data against known characteristics of the community as can be derived from OSMstats, but we suspect that the demographic data will also be, in and of themselves, of interest to much of the community.  I point out that there are some academic studies of the structure of the OSM community, and we will examine them as well with an eye to normalizing any selection biases we can.[3][4]
>>Third, while indeed about one quarter of respondents decline to provide the optional demographic data, we are on track to collect enough "full" surveys (i.e., including demographic data) to surpass a 3% confidence interval at the 99% confidence level.[5]
>>Fourth, as for taking the survey multiple times, this is indeed a possibility if individuals have multiple email addresses.  However, we choose to assume, in line with the Etiquette policy, "good faith" on the part of members of the OSM community.[6]  By and large the Board believes most members of the community who participate in the survey will do so in good faith.  That said, the reason respondents are required to register with an email address is exactly that--to discourage "gaming" the survey by responding multiple times.
>>Fifth, the Board is aware that there will be some inherent selection biases.  The survey is not distributed on paper; hence, it is selectively biased toward individuals with access to a computer and the internet.  We do not consider that a serious bias because those tools are required for contributing to or using OpenStreetMap.  It does not cover all languages of all in the community, so is selectively biased toward speakers of foreign languages (one of the 16 in the survey, not necessarily English).  It is selectively biased toward those who follow social media, are plugged into local chapters and communities, read WeeklyOSM, read the wiki landing page, or map (since the banner went up on  openstreetmap.org ). The survey is selectively biased against those who strictly map or use the data and are disinterested in OSMF policy matters, since they are less likely to take time to respond to the survey.  If you can identify other selection biases inherent in the survey, please share them with the Board.
>>cheers,
>>apm
>>[1]  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Surveys   The only previous survey to have been translated from English was the August 2019 survey for the local chapter congress, which was translated into 11 languages, of which 8 were European languages and 2 were Chinese in variant scripts; the other language was Persian.  The current survey is available in 7 Asian languages (Chinese, Indonesian, Japanese, Korean, Persian, Turkish, Vietnamese) as well as 9 European languages.
>>[2]  https://osmstats.neis-one.org/
>>[3]  https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10708-019-10035-z
>>[4]  https://2018.stateofthemap.org/2018/A09-Surveying_OSM_contributors__Learning_from_the_community/
>>[5]  http://www.stat.yale.edu/Courses/1997-98/101/confint.htm
>>[6]  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Etiquette
>>
>>-------
>>Allan Mustard, Chairperson
>>Board of Directors
>>OpenStreetMap Foundation _______________________________________________
>>talk mailing list
>>talk at openstreetmap.org
>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210124/6859a879/attachment-0001.htm>