Flip the Media
A blog about the digital media revolution

INTRODUCTION

With the proliferation of social networking sites, we are increasingly reliant on our online profiles to accurately present our personalities. But do they? Dr. Scott Counts of Microsoft Research’s VIBE Group explored just how people’s perceptions are impacted by the advent of online identities.

In a recent presentation of findings, Dr. Counts discussed studies that delved into the ways we self-present our personalities via online profiles and how others perceive those presentations.  The results were interesting, and proved the promising reliability and accuracy of the newfound ability to “right-click” on someone via their online profiles.

Below are the insight summaries from two of the Mircrosoft studies that focused on how people perceive personalities via online profiles.

STUDY ONE:  Automatic Trait Inferences

The first study demonstrated that people encode personality characteristics sub-consciously, and they are more likely to remember implied personality traits (i.e. you can infer that Ted is a hick because “he likes to go muddin’ and drink in the cornfields”).

Secondly, it showed that coherence (how clear your information fits together), and the number of attributes (how much you say), are two primary factors of your online profile that strongly correlate with a reader’s memory of it.

Taken together though, it demonstrated that if a personality trait is sub-consciously implied, then an abundance of attributes is actually negatively correlated with recall.

Takeaways:

  1. If people can imply a personality trait, they will have a better recall of you if you are more coherent and include less attributes.
  2. If people cannot imply a personality trait, than being less coherent and supplying more attributes is helpful for others to remember you.

Ideally, you can say very little about yourself and be remembered, so long as your story is clear about who you are.

STUDY 2: Thin Slices of Online Profile Attributes

Dr. Counts found Gladwell’s statement –  “the ability of our unconscious to find patterns in situations and people based on very narrow slices of experience” – to extend beyond face-to-face interactions to online interactions.

Takeaways:

  1. Certain attributes contribute more meaningfully to the interpretation of a profile than others, such as  favorite TV shows
  2. Users can make predictive inferences using condensed profiles
  • Inferences made from an “about me statement” are similar to inferences made from an entire profile
  • With only 5 attributes, people can do a pretty go job of determining if they would befriend a person
  • With a small amount of information, people are generally observed similarly by a number of readers

Thus, if your online profile merely includes a few free form attributes like your photo, favorite TV shows, and interests, people will get the gist.

CONCLUSION

Taken together, Dr. Counts Microsoft studies demonstrated that: we subconsciously infer other people’s personalities from their online profiles; these inferences are actually remembered much better than listed content; we form pretty accurate perceptions of personality from online profiles; and we need almost no information to infer personalities from online profiles.

Share this post:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...
This entry was posted on Sunday, February 15th, 2009 at 8:28 pm.
Categories: Research, Social Media.
Tags:, , , ,
Posted by margerynabors.

Related Posts

5 Comments, Comment or Ping

  1. Suna

    Did Dr. Counts explain what exactly does “online profile” mean in terms of his study? Does the “online profile” include the status updates on Facebook? On Twitter? Or is it just the information tab on your FB profile? The bio on Twitter? What about FB applications? Just curious…

  2. Q.1 It was my impression that when Dr. Count referred to an online profile, he meant to conjure up an idea of something similar to a “Facebook information tab”; a page that enabled users to input preform and open form fields to describe themselves publicly.

    Q.2 The status updates (or tweets) were not taken into account in Dr.Count’s studies, as the subjects whom he studied (avg. age 40 :-/) only updated a couple times a month. In my opinion, I think FB applications, groups, and status updates would have been compelling information to include.

    Please note: This article is simply my understanding of the studies, as they were presented by Dr. Counts. In no way is the information I provided comprehensive or meant to speak on behalf of the research conducted by the VIBE Group.

  3. rubir

    I have to admit that sometimes when I look at videos or stories that some of my Facebook friends post, I get a better idea of who they are and I have to remind myself that it is wrong to do that (stereotyping), but I’m only human!

  4. Raquel Hirai

    I was at the presentation as well, and I think Margery’s notes are pretty accurate. Just to add, the attributes that the research participants considered more informative, in this order, were: 1. photo, 2. interests, 3. interested in, 4. about me, 5. political views. The attribute they thought was last important was the number of groups that users belonged to.

  5. Great addition Raquel, thank you.

Reply to “Microsoft’s Research on Perceptions of Online Profiles”