ARTEFACT NUMBER 2: QUESTION AND ANSWERS
In a previous post I put up an example of the questions asked to subjects aged 20-25.
This is an evaluation of these findings:


Ed Walsh N0088641
Evaluation of Second Artefact
Questionnaires sent to age group 20-25
The question answers showed a vary of responses. However most of them did express the need for “real world” contact and that it is more important than socialising online. Although this is the case it seemed apparent that a lack of community activity for this age group was a factor. Some believed it was due to a lack of time, others just that didn't have an interest in engaging the community.
It was an underlining issue that the internet did not give sufficient engagment to class real friendships or community. I think this could be due to the age of the subjects. It is a very sociable age and most have only just started making their second phases of friends so a lot of social activities do occur for this age group. Also it may be due to the familiarity of the internet, other age groups (older) may find the internet as more of a novelty and find it a lot more interesting, whereas the age group in question have grown up with using it making it less exciting.
Here are some individual evaluations of the questionnaire:
PRP 2.1
Emma was perhaps an unexpected result. Not only was she very active online with forums and social networks, but she also does a lot of work within the community. I did not expect the level of community interaction from someone this age. I believe this is mainly due to the fact that she is involved in a religious group. It is apparent from the results that religion still holds strong community ties and all ages are encouraged to participate. It could be a reason that others of the same age do not engage more – there are fewer central meeting groups in the community in recent years, religion being one strong remainder.
PRP 2.2
Hayley was another subject that did some community work. She explained she did do work at a youth club and I feel this is for experience and perhaps a sense of duty. However when it came to here own personal social time she found it increasingly hard to meet with friends and communicate with peope (due to he work commitments and friends moving away). She felt that this where the Internet had helped. Also stating she did not feel internet communication was a valued as real world it was something that enabled here to carry on communicating where without it she may not.
So perhaps the Internet filled a gap but was not ideal.
PRP 2.3 – 2.6
These results were the more predictable of my findings. All expressed a lack of engagement in the community. Some expressed this was due to time commitments and some were just a fact of none interest. All did however use the internet to socialise and communicate. An underling factor of all results was the use of information on the web but these subjects also used the internet to engage in community. I thought that this would be the majority and it was. I believe it may be down to the lack of “sense of community” in todays society. I felt that many just wanted to socialise themsleves with friends and once their work commitments are over they do not feel a need to enhance a community in their area. I can understand this point and also the use of internet for these users. I feel that the internet did not actually stop the participants in engaging the community more just to enhance their communication with existing social groups. This point may not be the same for other age groups. Further research will uncover incidents where the internet does stop people engaging the community.