What matters most to you when reading a good book?

[bookideas]

Why is it "ick" for someone to say, "in exchange for your time, I'll give you something"?

[Demingy]

Originally Posted by bookideas

<snip>

I'm just curious how much people want to be able to converse with others about what they are reading as well as get good book recommendations?

And if whatever they use today is working well or not.

<snip>

As mentioned, MR is a place where people go to "converse with others about what they are reading as well as get good book recommendations" so you should beware that your survey is going to be biased already.

I am skeptical considering how little information we've been given about why you want the information and the fact that you've clearly targeted people who can already answer 'yes' to the question that I have in quotes. Seems like a good way to skew data for marketing a similar site to potential advertisers.

[Barbara1955]

Originally Posted by bookideas

Apologies! I didn't mean to come across as a scam. I'm just someone doing research into book reading habits because I'm considering whether there is a need for a new platform or tool to help. That's all.

Mostly...

I'm just curious how much people want to be able to converse with others about what they are reading as well as get good book recommendations?

And if whatever they use today is working well or not.

No scams. No uncles in Africa wanting to wire you $5,000. Etc.

Got to the Book Club Forum.... Join you local Book Clubs

[Demingy]

Originally Posted by bookideas

Huh. Interesting. Many companies, such as Google and Amazon and many others, offer incentives. It's a common practice when asking someone to give a significant amount of their time to answer questions mostly in the best interest of the business.

https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/5-sur...ponse-rates-2/

One thing many of those companies have is that they are well known/recognized. It is harder when dealing with some unknown entity, especially without information about what the survey is actually for.

[be4morgan]

I am honestly not a fan of a survey, I consider it as a good book when it has a good review online or recommended by a friend of mine.

Originally Posted by bookideas

Huh. Interesting. Many companies, such as Google and Amazon and many others, offer incentives. It's a common practice when asking someone to give a significant amount of their time to answer questions mostly in the best interest of the business.

https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/5-sur...ponse-rates-2/

When I opted in to a survey for Google some years ago, the invitation came from a verifiable Google address, and had in its signature text a person's name and job title, which I was able to google for myself to verify her identity. It also came with an NDA for respondents to sign, another strong evidence of the legitimacy of the project. The incentive was significant and worthwhile, to me, and the specifics of the incentive and how and when it would be delivered were clearly outlined. All of this meant that I had no qualms about participating in the research. It was a very interesting project to be a part of.

When I worked in market research and the companies I worked for conducted incentivised online research, they always included contact and verification details to help potential respondents feel reassured that the survey was legitimate.

Your survey, in contrast, is anonymous then says, in effect, "I'd like to pay you to know more about you". This does not inspire confidence. Suspicion and reluctance are natural reactions in this context.

As for the technical issues I noted, they were minor. I felt that there could have been more "N/A" options, and better skip logic for a couple of questions that could have benefitted from such an option.

[BookCat]

It sounds like you might be doing research for an app of somekind. The book form communities, whether here or elsewhere, have covered the need to chat to others about what we're reading or ask for recommendations. So if that's what you're thinking of I'm afraid it's been covered.

[bookideas]

Originally Posted by BookCat

It sounds like you might be doing research for an app of somekind. The book form communities, whether here or elsewhere, have covered the need to chat to others about what we're reading or ask for recommendations. So if that's what you're thinking of I'm afraid it's been covered.

That's okay. If the need is satisfied, that's great! Appreciate everyone's thoughts!

[bookideas]

Honestly, I wasn't intending to stir trouble, but just learn. That's all.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by bookideas

Honestly, I wasn't intending to stir trouble, but just learn. That's all.

I think where you got off on the wrong foot was making a first post in a discussion forum that showed no intention of discussing anything on the forum. That you actually came back to check responses was a surprise to me.

[rogueconnecticut]

I hate flashbacks! Just wan't to get the story rolling along. Always annoyed me in the TV show Lost, whenever they'd do that :P

[haertig]

I always think of surveys and polls like this: They say, e.g., "80% of respondents think such-and-such" but what I read into that is "80% of respondents stupid enough to get trapped into their poll think such-and-such". Poll results inherently show you what stupid people are thinking. Not a statistic I'd want to base policy or any important decision on.

I'm not talking about friendly polls on forums such as ours. I'm talking about the political polls that say "We called 1000 random citizens..." What they don't mention is that 997 of those citizens hung up on them, leaving the poll with results based on the three stupid ones who stayed on the line.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by haertig

I always think of surveys and polls like this: They say, e.g., "80% of respondents think such-and-such" but what I read into that is "80% of respondents stupid enough to get trapped into their poll think such-and-such". Poll results inherently show you what stupid people are thinking. Not a statistic I'd want to base policy or any important decision on.

I'm not talking about friendly polls on forums such as ours. I'm talking about the political polls that say "We called 1000 random citizens..." What they don't mention is that 997 of those citizens hung up on them, leaving the poll with results based on the three stupid ones who stayed on the line.

Not quite right. If the results on based on 1000 respondents, they will call until they have 1000 people who were willing to talk to them. This can take an awful lot of calls -- one recent phone poll in this area stated that it took over 50,000 calls to get 800 people to talk to them. If you based the poll on the results from 3 people -- 67% of the people surveyed said they would support banning all motor vehicles from downtown Vancouver with a confidence level of 23%.

[BookCat]

Reminds me of the old cat food advert "8 out of 10 cats prefer (Whiskas?)" Always made me wonder what alternatives the cats were offered; probably something cheap and tasteless to cats, or maybe a lettuce leaf!

[Luffy]

I dislike the odd subgenre, magical realism.