step three.2parison anywhere between Users having Pet and you can Profiles as opposed to Pets

step three.2parison anywhere between Users having Pet and you can Profiles as opposed to Pets

Socio-demographic data and you will number of reputation photographs displayed for everyone analysed pages (letter = 2400) and you may separately to own Vienna (n = 1200) and you may 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 the users who did not do so resulted in the following significant differences (see Desk 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 data and you will quantity of character photo shown for everyone users which have dogs (letter = 373) and you may profiles instead of pets (letter = 2027).

3.step three. Prevalence and you will Classification out-of Pet Exhibited for the Profiles

A deeper reason for the study would be to regulate how of numerous profiles presented dogs and you can what kinds of animal had been displayed. Generally, significantly more profiles into the Vienna (211; 17.6%) let you know dogs to their character than simply pages during the Tokyo (162; 13.5%) (? 2 (1) = eight.622; p = 0.006). Most of the pages-i.e., 77.7% inside Vienna and 76.5% when you look at the Tokyo-presented your pet, otherwise animals, with the a single reputation photo. When you look at the a smaller ratio of instances-i.age., 22.3% within the Vienna and you can 23.5% from inside the Tokyo-the newest pages got more than one photographs demonstrating the pet, or pets, inside their profile.

step 3.step three.step 1. Presentation off Animals in the first Reputation Images

Of your 373 users choosing to is creature pictures, 73 (19.6%) presented the latest pet on their basic reputation photos. Here, testing out of profiles in the Vienna and you can Tokyo found extreme distinctions while the 65.9% users inside Vienna shown your pet dog on the basic photographs while the weighed against 31.3% away from pages into the Tokyo (? dos (1) = 8.610, p = 0.003). In addition, simply profiles into the Vienna (a dozen.2%) demonstrate ranch dogs into the basic profile images. That it triggered a change to profiles from inside the Tokyo (? dos (1) = cuatro.189, p = 0.041). I along with discovered that way more users into the Tokyo exhibited pets (40.6%) and you will amazing animals (fifteen.6%) within first character photos than just pages for the Vienna (cats = dos.4%; amazing dogs = 0.0%) (cats: ? 2 (1) = 7.819, p = 0.005; amazing pet: ? 2 (1) = 6.877, p = 0.009).

3.step three.2. Demonstration out of Pet in most Character Pictures (Like the Basic Reputation 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 ).

Ohlala review

Leave a Reply