Melbourne University Effective Altruism Study
post by Emily Grundy
This is a link post for https://melbourneuni.au1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eh8QlSjyXyxVbIF
If you identify as an Effective Altruist (EA), you are invited to participate in a study being conducted by The University of Melbourne. Our broader project investigates how various personality characteristics relate to moral judgements and actions. In this particular study, we aim to gain a robust understanding of the personality characteristics of EAs, which will provide the basis for follow-up studies testing the inclination toward effective altruism in non-EAs.
This research will be valuable for movement growth. Specifically, it will be useful for identifying people who may be inclined towards endorsing effective altruism ideas, yet who are currently unaware of effective altruism itself.
The survey will take approximately 20 minutes. For every survey completed, AUD$5 will be donated to the Against Malaria Foundation.
For any questions regarding this study, please don’t hesitate to contact me (Emily Grundy; email@example.com) or Dr. Luke Smillie (firstname.lastname@example.org).
To participate in this study, you must be aged 18+ and fluent in English. If you would like to participate, please follow the URL below!
Comments sorted by top scores.
comment by Larks ·
2019-06-14T20:57:01.431Z · EA(p) · GW(p)
Some of the questions seem somewhat geography specific - I suspect different moral intuitions may be at play depending on the nationality of the respondent for indexical reasons. You might want to consider customizing the prompts based on IP address or similar. (Deliberately vague to avoid spoilers).
comment by Jamie_Harris ·
2019-06-21T19:40:34.575Z · EA(p) · GW(p)
Enjoyed taking part. Will you post the results on the Forum? I look forward to seeing them.
1) some of the questions referred to "persons" or similar words, implying humans. Other questions referred to "others" which I interpreted as including animals. Interpreting as humans as opposed to humans and other animals (or vice versa) affected my answers in some cases. (Not sure if the wording was chosen for consistency with existing psychological scales)
2) you may get some selection effects from donating to AMF, rather than offering EAs the option to choose from different options (e.g. can pick whichever EA Fund they'd prefer)
3) Here you said you'd donate to AMF and then I got told at the end it would go to GiveDirectly
comment by Emily Grundy ·
2019-07-04T01:35:40.843Z · EA(p) · GW(p)
Thanks also for the feedback Jamie. We should be posting a summary of the results on the forum, though if you participated and wanted to ensure that you get that when it becomes available just send me through an email (address in original post). In response to your comments:
1) This is a good point, and the scales can at times be ambiguous and open to interpretation. You are correct in that the wording was maintained to be consistent with existing scales.
2) Unfortunately due to some constraints/ethics applications we were required to select one charity, and did not have the opportunity to leave this open.
3) The $5 specified for every survey completed does go to AMF. There may be tasks in the survey which involve donations to other charities such as GiveDirectly, where highlighted in the survey.