Difference between revisions of "Acilar and Aydemir (2010)"

From Copyright EVIDENCE
m (Saved using "Save and continue" button in form)
m (Text replacement - "Software publishing (including video games)" to "Software publishing")
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 27: Line 27:
 
|FundamentalIssue=5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media),
 
|FundamentalIssue=5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media),
 
|EvidenceBasedPolicy=F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness),
 
|EvidenceBasedPolicy=F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness),
|Discipline=D03: Behavioral Microeconomics • Underlying Principles
+
|Discipline=D03: Behavioral Microeconomics • Underlying Principles, K42: Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law, O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
 
|Intervention-Response=Potential policy implications include:  
 
|Intervention-Response=Potential policy implications include:  
  
Line 36: Line 36:
 
*Further studies need to focus on why and how gender influences student‘ attitudes towards software piracy.
 
*Further studies need to focus on why and how gender influences student‘ attitudes towards software piracy.
 
|Description of Data=Convenience sample of 435 undergraduate Business Administration students at a Turkish University. The authors state that the data was collected during the Autumn term 2009, which I have interpretted to mean Sep-Nov 2009.
 
|Description of Data=Convenience sample of 435 undergraduate Business Administration students at a Turkish University. The authors state that the data was collected during the Autumn term 2009, which I have interpretted to mean Sep-Nov 2009.
|Data Year=September-November 2009
+
|Data Year=September to November 2009
 
|Data Type=Primary data
 
|Data Type=Primary data
 
|Data Source=None;
 
|Data Source=None;
 
|Method of Collection=Qualitative Collection Methods, Survey Research (qualitative; e.g. consumer preferences)
 
|Method of Collection=Qualitative Collection Methods, Survey Research (qualitative; e.g. consumer preferences)
 
|Method of Analysis=Descriptive statistics (counting; means reporting; cross-tabulation)
 
|Method of Analysis=Descriptive statistics (counting; means reporting; cross-tabulation)
|Industry=Software publishing (including video games);
+
|Industry=Software publishing;
 
|Country=Turkey;
 
|Country=Turkey;
 
|Cross-country=No
 
|Cross-country=No
Line 52: Line 52:
 
|Sample Size=435
 
|Sample Size=435
 
|Level of Aggregation=University students,
 
|Level of Aggregation=University students,
|Data Material Year=September-November 2009
+
|Data Material Year=September to November 2009
 
}}
 
}}
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 08:44, 3 November 2022

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education Libraries, archives, museums and other cultural activities

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing Video game publishing Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Acilar and Aydemir (2010)
Title: Students' Attitudes Towards Software Piracy-The Gender Factor: A Case of a Public University in an Emerging Country
Author(s): Acilar, A., Aydemir, M.
Year: 2010
Citation: Acilar, A., & Aydemir, M. (2010). Students' Attitudes Towards Software Piracy-The Gender Factor: A Case of a Public University in an Emerging Country. In The Eleventh ETHICOMP International Conference on the Social and Ethical Impacts of Information and Communication Technology.
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: Convenience sample of 435 undergraduate Business Administration students at a Turkish University. The authors state that the data was collected during the Autumn term 2009, which I have interpretted to mean Sep-Nov 2009.
Data Type: Primary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • September to November 2009
Funder(s):
  • None

Abstract

The main purpose of the present study is to explore the relationship between gender of the students and their attitudes towards software piracy. Research data were obtained by surveying the undergraduate students of the Department of Business Administration at a public university in Turkey. Independent samples t-test was used for comparisons between male and female students' attitudes. It is found that female students find software piracy less acceptable than male students. The study finding is consistent with previous studies that reported female student participants are significantly more ethical than male student participants in terms of software piracy.

Main Results of the Study

The main results reported in the study are:

  • The research found that there is a significant difference between male and female students‘ attitudes towards software piracy.
  • The study findings suggest that female students find software piracy to be much less acceptable than male students. This result is consistent with previous studies showing that female students are more ethical than male students in terms of software piracy.
  • The highest difference between male and female students‘ mean scores on the Lickert scale used in the questionnaire was 0.50, in response to the statement, "I think it is okay to use pirated games software for entertainment."
  • The lowest difference between mean scores of males and females on the Lickert scale used in the questionnaire was 0.20, in response to the statement, "I see nothing wrong in using pirated software if it is badly needed for the success of a project."

The study reports the following limitations:

  • The study used a convenience sampling technique, therefore it is difficult to generalise the results.
  • The sample of the study is composed of undergraduate students of the Department of Business Administration, and the study was administered in a public university in Turkey: the inclusion of students from different departments and universities would provide opportunities to better understand gender differences in software piracy.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

Potential policy implications include:

  • The difference between male and female students‘ attitudes towards software piracy should be taken into consideration in preparing corporate ethics policies, professional codes of conduct, and rewards/punishment systems for computer related unethical conduct.
  • Greater understanding of the relationship between gender and ethics will improve education and training programmes designed to improve ethical awareness and sensitivity.
  • Further studies need to focus on why and how gender influences student‘ attitudes towards software piracy.



Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Green-tick.png
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)
Green-tick.png

Datasets

Sample size: 435
Level of aggregation: University students
Period of material under study: September to November 2009