Consent From
Study title: Consideration in Software-mediated Social Interaction
I am a Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Science and Technology at Bournemouth University.
As part of my research activities, I am conducting a study which requires this interview. The
study aims to gather and analyze people’s opinion on what makes a software-mediated
interaction considerate and well-mannered and what importance people give to that in
comparison to other business objectives. When we understand this, we can design software
which enables their users to tailor their own interaction regime towards a more “social”
software-mediated interaction.
All information obtained in this study will be kept strictly confidential and anonymous unless
permission is given by the interviewee to the interviewer for a specific context. The results of
this study will be presented collectively and no individual participants will be identified
without their permissions.
Data Protection:
Bournemouth University is a registered Data Controller. Any information that you supply
will be held anonymously and securely in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998 and
will only be used for the purposes of this interview. Your personal details will not be made
available outside the University. Any queries regarding Data Protection should be addressed
to the Information Officer at [email protected]. If we give you an online
survey, cookies, personal data stored by your Web browser, are not used in this survey.
Acknowledgement of Study, Consent, and Agreement to be recorded:
I have been informed of and understand the purpose and procedures of this study and the
purpose and procedures of this interview/these interviews.
I understand that I am free to withdraw my consent and discontinue my participation in this
interview or study at any time. I understand that I can choose to answer only the questions
that I wish to answer.
I understand that the interview will be audiotaped or digitally recorded and then transcribed.
Permission to Quote:
I may wish to quote your words directly in reports and publications resulting from this. With
regards to being quoted, please check yes or no for each of the following statements:
Yes
No
I wish to review the notes / recordings collected during my interview.
I agree that researchers may publish documents that contain quotations by me under the
following conditions (checking YES to any of the below means that you grant copyright
permission to the researcher for the purpose of publication):
Yes
No
I agree to be quoted directly (my name is used).
Yes
No
Yes
No
I agree to be quoted directly if my name is not published (I remain
anonymous).
I agree to be quoted directly if a made-up name (pseudonym) is used.
By signing this consent form, you are indicating that you fully understand the above
information and agree to participate in this study.
Participant's signature ___________________________________________
Date: _____________________________________________
Researcher's signature: __________________________________________
Date: _____________________________________________
If you have any questions about this study, please contact me by email on
[email protected] . Any queries regarding Data Protection should be addressed to the
Information Officer at [email protected]
Introduction Script:
Thank you for helping me out. I’m interested in learning about considerate and wellmannered software-mediated social interaction.
With you permission I would like to record the session so that I can review it later for
research purpose only.
With your permission, I’m going to begin recording now.
Do you have any questions regarding the information letter or the consent form?
Do you agree to volunteer?
Remember that this is to learn about you, there are no wrong answers and every bit of
information you can give me is helpful.
In the context of this interview we will be talking the social interaction which is mediated via
software, i.e. interaction that software can do for you to interact with others.
Let me emphasize that we consider that interaction within a business environment. I.e. the set
of interactions and their used templates, e.g., for the text content, is limited either by the
software itself or by the purpose and the convention of the colleagues using the software. In
other words, it is not free-style interaction and the interaction is to serve certain business
goals within an enterprise.
Let me introduce two scenarios to you so that you become more familiar with the concept this
interview is trying to explore.
Scenario 1. You work in an enterprise and you are responsible of organizing a meeting. Your
meeting organizer software (say Outlook) sent invitations to a list of people and asked them
to respond. The meeting is marked as important and a response is requested. Some
colleagues did not respond. You could configure the meeting organizer software to keep
sending them reminders. Your meeting organizer software allows you to use a stricter
template for the reminder when the colleague does not respond to the first. If this continues,
the meeting organizer offers the possibility to send the reminders and put the manager of the
invitee in the carbon copy of the invitation.
You could configure the meeting organizer software to deal with those contacts case by case
depending on the type of relation you have with them or their particular status, and perhaps
importance for the meeting, etc. Please remember that the way you send the reminder and
invitation could affect both the willingness of people to attend and also your relation with
them when collaborating for other objectives. Also, consider that you might yourself be in a
situation where you find the invitation inconsiderate, i.e. as invitee. Also, you may want to
think of a scenario where you send the invitation only a short time before the meeting. Some
would think this could affect the need to be highly considerate.
Still, please let me emphasize, as a convention in the enterprise, you should stick to the
facilities the meeting organizer software is offering you and avoid personalizing things that
much, e.g. highly personalize the text sent to each invitee as this will be highly
unprofessional. Hence, we are not talking about social network like Facebook where users
are highly free in what they write and how they communicate.
Scenario 2. Suppose a shared editing scenario, e.g. Google Doc. There could be a number of
operations allowed for you as a creator of the file, like inviting colleagues to edit, unshare at
certain point, rejecting changes, etc. At certain point, when the number of comments
increases, the system will allow you to delete some comments, or to create another file where
you could put comments under a name like “redundant comments”, or “potentially
considered at later stage” or “unimportant/out of scope”. At certain point you may invite
new people to the shared document. The system allows you add new editors. Notice that when
you do that some of the existing editors could be annoyed especially when that new editor can
see the history of the discussion, etc. When the objective of the editing is achieved, you may
unshare the file. This could be still seen as an inconsiderate by some of the people. However,
you may unshare it only with a number of people. How you would decide that? Another
scenario could happen when you do not expect a person to contribute any new things, then
you may unshare the file with that person. However, this may upset that person. How you
would think of that? What if that person is important to you? How you define importance?
Interview Protocol:
Time of Interview:
Date:
Place:
Interviewee:
Interviewer:
I will ask you short questions and I expect short answers about that:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Tell me a little about you?
What do you do?
How old are you?
How would classify yourself from the consideration point of view?
What kind of software application do you use? Is there any software you use which is
social in the sense that you can interact with others, e.g. the shared editing, a social
network, etc.
I would like to ask 8 questions now and please feel free to elaborate on your answers. At the
end, you will still be given the chance to add anything else.
1. Do you think some software-mediate interaction could be classified as inconsiderate?
Could you give examples? You can use the scenarios I explained in the beginning if
this is better for you. [we could give example: E.g. unshared a file without leaving a
local copy with other colleagues on DropBox on Google Doc, inviting new people to
join a closed group and allowing them to see the previous discussions, etc.]
2. When using software, would you significantly be caution that some softwaremediated interaction could cause inconvenience to your colleagues? E.g. to unshare a
file and not leave a local copy, to revoke a permission to edit because you believe the
user is not any more adding good insights and to reduce the amount of comments, etc.
3. What are the reasons that would motivate you to be considerate? Please think that you
are in a business environment, i.e. the software is professional and serving business
goals in the main place.
4. Sometimes you have no options but perhaps being inconsiderate to some of your
colleagues. For example, when the number of comments on the shared documents is
tremendously increasing then you would give them a limited number of times to
comment. You have the choice to do that with some users and exempt others. You
may even stop some users on commenting especially if the topic is now not their
speciality. Please notice that you have a work relationship with these people. How
you would you decide your actions when there is no way to establish your objective
without causing some degree of inconvenience to some colleagues?
5. Let me elaborate a bit on the previous point. What will be the important factors which
influence you decision on whom to restrict and whom to allow editing the file when
the number of comments and edits increases? Remember that your reaction with these
colleagues may not only affect the collaboration on the document being edited but
could have effects beyond the scope of that software.
[Optional: you did not get the example? Let me give you another example. Some
colleague did not respond to your meeting request. You have several choices on how
to handle that. E.g. the meeting organizer software could send a reminder, repetitive
reminder, reminders and at certain point the managers of the invitee in the CC, just
skip them. If some still did not respond you have the choice to not include them in the
list of users with whom you share the document, etc. How will you take your
decision? ]
6. What kind of help you would like the software to offer you in order to manage your
consideration requirements and perhaps balance that with other business requirements
so that you try to achieve both?
7. Would you like other colleagues to know what annoys you so that they may avoid that
or the software could recommend to them certain ways to communicate with you?
Would you elaborate a bit on that?
8. On the same time, would you like other colleagues to reveal their perception on the
kinds of interaction which could cause them inconvenience so you could configure the
software to allow operations which minimize inconvenience to them when possible?
Would you elaborate on that a bit?
9. If I had any follow up questions would you mind if I emailed you?
Considerate Software – questionnaire
This survey is to get your opinion on the elements of considerate software-based social
interaction and how you understand consideration and react to inconsideration when the
interaction is done via software. We study consideration in a Business Environment. So
please take that into account when giving your answers. The interaction could be direct or
indirect.
 Examples of direct interaction include sending invitations and reminders for a
meeting, commenting on someone's post, like/dislike, tagging a persons in a
picture on a social network, re-tweeting a tweet or commenting on it, adding
someone to a group, removing you from a group copying you in an email thread, etc.
 Examples of indirect interaction, assuming a collaborative editing of a document,
include: locking the document to edit, using different font color to differentiate each
one contribution, putting a comment on certain sentences, copying parts of the
documenting and posting on some social network and adhering or violating the
convention of shared editing (by using your color or nick name).
By the end of the survey we will send you the results so that you can compare your answers
to other colleagues’ answers. This should be exciting for you to see how your answers
compare to the others.
We will organize a draw and 5 winners will get Amazon vouchers, 10£ each... so please
provide your Email so that we may contact you.
There are 14 Questions.
We will use this survey for research purposes only. We will not use the participants names in
any report we produce to disseminate the results of this survey.
Q1: Please specify your gender
 Male
 Female
Q2: What is your age?
 12-17
 18-24
 25-34
 35-44
 45-54
 55-64
 65-74
 75 and above
Q3: Have you used software which requires social interaction, e.g. social network,
collaborative work, shared editing, meeting organizer, events coordination, etc.
 Yes
 Sometimes
 No
Q4: In a business environment, when you are about to make an interaction which
might be seen inconsiderate by some of the recipients/audience, which of these items
you would look at to decide whether to execute it or revise it?
 The effect on the business, e.g. others would be upset and this affect the entire business
 Colleagues and recipients could react, e.g. they may delay their response
 Mental cost, e.g. you may keep thinking whether someone was upset
 You may become socially isolated and others stop interacting with you
 Other, or I would like to add a comment ____________________
Q5: In a business environment, interactions are usually done to achieve certain goals.
Which of these items would you look at to evaluate the considerate nature of an
interaction?
 The goal for which the interaction is made affects my judgement, e.g. one could tolerate
strict or less-friendly reminders to respond to an invitation if the event is highly important
 The constraints on achieving that goal which could affect why the interaction is made
that way, e.g. one would understand being sent the invitation as an SMS, rather than a
formal email or letter, if the meeting is urgent
 I would look at the other ways which are available to the communicator to reach the
same goal, e.g. if the communicators could get the input from me by email then I would
view their urgent and strict request for meeting differently from the case where they don't
have that option.
 Others, or I would like to add a comment ____________________
Q6: In a business environment, which of the following would you consider somehow
inconsiderate?
 1- Termination of membership, e.g., "why am I no longer in this mailing list, group,
shared document?"
 2- Locking, e.g. someone is locking the shared document for a long time so you can not
edit it?
 3- Ignoring, e.g., "I sent the invitation and asked all to respond with yes or no, why some
are not responding?"
 4- Flame Wars, e.g. "why am I involved in all this debate and message exchange and
why don't they stop and come back to the main topic?"
 5- Laziness, e.g. "why are they forwarding this long email to me, couldn't they say
exactly which bit of it I should look at and why?"
 6- Formality level, e.g. "this is too casual, I hardly know them.... or this is ultra-formal"
 7- Timeliness, e.g. "they are taking too much time to reply and I do not even know
whether they got the message"
 8- Pressure, e.g. "they copied everyone in this email just to put pressure on me to
respond"
 9- Invading personal space, e.g. "why do they keep tagging me in Facebook pictures?
and saying personal stuff when commenting on my posts"
 10- Irrelevance, e.g. "why did they add me to that group... I have no interest in it"
 11- Violation of the norms of the work environment, e.g. "it is quite unusual in our
company to tweet or post in forums about business relations, but they keep doing that"
 12- Abrupt/Curt Wording, e.g. "they could have used clearer and more friendly words to
communicate the same message."
 Other, or I would like to comment ____________________
Q7: In a business environment, and when you evaluate the considerate nature of a
social interaction with a colleague, which of these items would you be looking at?
 The relation, e.g. is he/she your friend or line manager or a person I have an occasional
contact with
 The value of that colleague, e.g. is that colleague expert in what I am trying to do and
how can he/she helps/affects what I aim to achieve
 Personality, e.g. is that colleague polite, open, pragmatic, harsh, etc.
 Interaction history (how you both interacted in the past)
 Situation awareness, e.g. "I know they were driving and busy so I understand the brevity
and lack of clarity in their interaction"
 Visibility of the interaction to others, e.g. "I could send it as a personal message, no need
to publish that on the forum or copy others"
 Others, or I would like to add a comment ____________________
Q8: In a business environment, how do you classify yourself with respect to the
inconsiderate interaction?
 Relaxed about inconsideration
 Cautious in my interaction not to look inconsiderate
 Anxious that I may look inconsiderate
 I do not even note it
 Others, or I would like to add a comment ____________________
Q9: What do you think of the following statements?
Agree
Partially agree
Disagree
People have different
views whether an
interaction is considerate
or not



My view of what is
considerate/inconsiderate
could evolve/change over
time..



Though I feel it, it is
difficult to express in
words what make an
interaction
considerate/inconsiderate



Q10: In a business environment, how would you like to declare your perception of
considerate interactions?
 I prefer to say that explicitly to colleagues
 I prefer to say that anonymously, e.g., social software could tell colleagues that a certain
interaction annoys someone, but without mentioning my name
 I prefer that there is an authority which collects concerns from colleagues and makes it
public (without mentioning names)
 I prefer others learn my view of consideration over time through the way I Interact with
them
 Others, or I would like to add a comment ____________________
Q11: In a business environment, how do you usually treat inconsideration?
 Ad-hoc: I behave naturally, I do not think much about it
 Conservative: I would use standard communication to avoid looking inconsiderate
 Receptive: I am open to people telling me what annoys them or if I did something
inconsiderate
 Anxious: at times, I feel anxious if my interaction could be seen inconsiderate by
someone
 Practical: as long as the interaction is compliant with the rules and for the benefit of the
business I do not care that much
 Authority seeker: I would consult the managers when I need to interact or when I receive
some inconsiderate interaction
 Evasive: when possible, I would try to say that I am only the messenger and the
business required me to interact this way
 Apologetic: I tend to apologize, sometimes in advance, if I may look or looked
inconsiderate
 Others, or I would like to add a comment ____________________
Q12: Which of these would describe you?
 Adhering to norms: As long as I follow the norms, I do not give much attention if
colleagues see my interaction as inconsiderate
 Similar treatment: I treat others the way I like to be treated
 Altruistic: If I receive an inconsiderate interaction, I try to let it go so that the business
progresses smoothly
 Negotiator: I try to clarify with others to achieve a common protocol of how to interact
 Others, or I would like to add a comment ____________________
Q13: In relation to consideration, what of the following would you like future software
systems to support?
 Offer guidance on what would be seen inconsiderate/considerate, e.g. hints and tips
 Give users control on the design of social interaction, both as communicator and as
communicatee
 Offer a communication channel between colleagues to set up their interaction protocol
 Intelligence that balances between strictness in enforcing consideration and efficiency of
the business (strictness could hinder rich communication)
 Diversity of alternative interaction styles to accommodate the diversity of users and their
perception of consideration
 Novel software solutions and rich interfaces to raise awareness of inconsiderate
behaviors
 Intelligence that adapts the social interaction to the culture and the norms of the
environment where the users interact
 Acting as a gate keeper to handle messages based on their considerate nature, e.g.
prioritizing, filtering, flagging, etc.
 Others, or I would like to add a comment ____________________
Q14: For social interactions in a business environment, which of the following would
you like?
 I would like to know how my colleagues would view the considerate nature of certain
social interactions
 I would like my colleagues to know how I view the considerate nature of certain social
interactions
 I would NOT like my colleagues to know how I view the considerate nature of certain
social interactions
 I would like my colleagues to know my view only if they also let me know their view of the
considerate nature of a social interaction
 Others, or I would like to comment ____________________
FINALLY Your comments and insights are welcome .. In addition, please add your
email as well so we can contact you with the results of this survey and with the
results of the draw on the Amazon vouchers ----------------------------------------------------