3.2parison anywhere between Users that have Pet and you can Users as opposed to Pet

3.2parison anywhere between Users that have Pet and you can Users as opposed to Pet

Socio-group study and you will level of reputation photographs exhibited for everyone analysed users (n = 2400) and separately to possess Vienna (letter = 1200) and you can 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-market study and you may number of reputation photos showed for everyone users with dogs (n = 373) and pages as opposed to pet (n = 2027).

step 3.step three. Frequency and Classification off Pets Shown on Profiles

A further intent behind the research were to determine how of several users presented pets and you may what types of animal have been exhibited. In general, significantly more users within the Vienna (211; 17.6%) tell you dogs on the character than profiles from inside the Tokyo (162; thirteen.5%) ( https://datingranking.net/get-it-on-review/? dos (1) = eight.622; p = 0.006). Most of the pages-we.elizabeth., 77.7% inside Vienna and you can 76.5% from inside the Tokyo-showed the pet, or pet, with the an individual profile pictures. Inside the a smaller sized ratio out of instances-we.age., twenty two.3% from inside the Vienna and you can 23.5% inside Tokyo-the fresh new users got several photographs demonstrating your pet, otherwise pets, inside their profile.

3.step three.step one. Demonstration from Pet in the first Reputation Photographs

Of 373 users deciding to were creature images, 73 (19.6%) presented the new pet on their earliest profile pictures. Right here, testing of profiles during the Vienna and Tokyo shown high distinctions just like the 65.9% pages inside Vienna displayed your pet dog with the very first photographs given that compared to 29.3% off users into the Tokyo (? 2 (1) = 8.610, p = 0.003). Additionally, just pages when you look at the Vienna (12.2%) have demostrated ranch animals to the earliest character photo. That it resulted in a change to pages inside the Tokyo (? 2 (1) = 4.189, p = 0.041). I and found that so much more profiles in Tokyo exhibited cats (forty.6%) and you can unique dogs (fifteen.6%) within their basic character photos than simply pages inside Vienna (pets = dos.4%; exotic animals = 0.0%) (cats: ? dos (1) = eight.819, p = 0.005; exotic dogs: ? dos (1) = 6.877, p = 0.009).

3.step three.2. Presentation of Pets throughout Profile Photo (Including the First Profile Photographs)

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 ).