step three.2parison between Profiles with Animals and you may Pages in the place of Animals
Socio-group analysis and you will amount of character photos presented for all analysed users (n = 2400) and you will individually to possess Vienna (letter = 1200) and 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-group investigation and number of reputation photos showed for everybody users that have animals (letter = 373) and you may pages without dogs (letter = 2027).
step three.step three. Prevalence and you may Categorisation out-of Pets Shown into Users
A further intent behind the study would be to decide how of many profiles presented animals and what types of animal have been exhibited. Typically, a whole lot more profiles when you look at the Vienna (211; 17.6%) tell you animals to their character than pages within the Tokyo (162; thirteen.5%) (? dos (1) = seven.622; p = 0.006). Most of the profiles-we.e., 77.7% inside Vienna and you may 76.5% when you look at the Tokyo-showed your pet, or animals, with the an individual profile pictures. During the an inferior proportion out-of circumstances-we.elizabeth., 22.3% inside the Vienna and you can 23.5% when you look at the Tokyo-the users got more than one photo showing the pet, otherwise pets, in their reputation.
3.step 3.1. Demonstration regarding Pets in the first Reputation Photographs
Of your 373 pages deciding to were creature pictures, 73 (19.6%) presented the fresh new pets on their earliest character pictures. Here, investigations of profiles during the Vienna and you will Tokyo shown extreme variations once the 65.9% profiles inside the Vienna presented your pet dog to the very first photos since the weighed against 30.3% of pages when you look at the Tokyo (? dos (1) = 8.610, p = 0.003). Additionally, simply users into the Vienna (a dozen.2%) have indicated farm animals on earliest profile photos. This triggered a distinction in order to profiles in Tokyo (? dos (1) = 4.189, p = 0.041). I and learned that way more pages in the Tokyo shown pets (forty.6%) and you will amazing dogs (fifteen.6%) in their first profile images than simply pages from inside the Vienna (cats = dos.4%; unique dogs = 0.0%) (cats: ? 2 (1) = eight.819, p = 0.005; unique animals: ? 2 (1) = six.877, p = 0.009).
step 3.3.dos. Presentation away from Pets in all Profile Photos (Such as the Earliest Profile Images)
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 ).
