This appendix describes our applicability check in more detail. The purpose of the applicability check (Rosemann and Vessey 2008) was to determine whether attribute data could be transformed to a form (in this case, species level classification) useful to data consumers (in this case, biologists). We also used the applicability check to explore perceptions that biologists in a university setting held about the potential uses and usefulness of data collected using an instance-based approach (versus a class-based approach). The applicability check is discussed briefly in the main manuscript; here, we provide details about the method we used to collect data, and the feedback we received from participants. Method We tested the applicability of an attribute-based data collection approach to users of UGC via an interactive seminar presentation. We made the presentation as part of a seminar series in the Department of Geography at Memorial University of Newfoundland, as geography is a field in which there is considerable interest in crowdsourced UGC (referred to by geographers as volunteered geographic information) and none of the authors are affiliated with the department. We developed a questionnaire, which was distributed in paper form, on the tables where audience members sat. The questionnaire asked six open-ended questions about the perceived benefits and limitations of both instance-based versus class-based approaches, as well as about potential applications of the instance-based approach to the respondent's own research. In addition, there were two questions asking respondents to rank (on a seven-point Likert scale) their agreement with two statements, one about the relevance and applicability of the instance-based data collection approach and the other about the relevance and applicability of the experimental findings we presented. The questionnaire also included some biographical questions (gender, position, research field, highest degree obtained).

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Online social networks can bridge the gap between distant individuals by simulating online experiences that closely resemble physical interactions. While people have positive experiences, such as joy, in a physical relationship and would like to enjoy those experiences online, they also have negative experiences, such as being subject to a lie. An online social network may allow users to lie to simulate a real-world social group better. However, lying must be prevented on social networks as unethical behavior. Thus, this study aims to investigate an ethical dilemma raised due to the two abovementioned perspectives. Design/methodology/approach This paper examines different aspects of lying in social networks, using a comprehensive descriptive literature review approach and a classification scheme. Findings Contrary to their initial intent, social networks are disrupting the traditional notion of human interaction, either by disregarding the presence of dishonesty or by attempting to regulate relationships. In this research, the authors examine the challenges of these two perspectives by identifying enablers, consequences and control measures of lying on social networks at the individual, social and technological levels. The authors also develop a framework to facilitate investigating this dilemma. Originality/value This paper examines a controversial topic. Although lying is unethical, allowing users to lie may be considered an appealing feature of social network platforms. This paper offers a framework to propose several research directions for future studies. This study’s examination focuses on the challenges associated with deception on social networks, prompting the formulation of three crucial questions regarding the potential impact of technology on such behavior.