Mobile phones and wrong numbers: how Maasai agro-pastoralists form and use accidental social ties in East Africa

Mobile phones are recognized as important new tools for rural development in the Global South, but few studies have examined how phones can shape social networks. This study documents a new type of social tie, enabled by mobile phones, that to our knowledge has not previously been discussed in academic literature. In 2018, we discovered that Maasai pastoralists in northern Tanzania create new social ties through wrong numbers, a phenomenon with implications for theory on social networks and path dependency. We used a mixed ethnographic and survey-based design to examine the following: (1) the conditions under which wrong number connections (WNCs) are made; (2) the incidence of these connections in the study area; and (3) the association between WNCs and multiple livelihood strategies. Working in 10 rural communities in Tanzania, we conducted 16 group interviews with men about their phone use and found that WNCs are diverse and can provide households with important information, resources, and opportunities from an expansive geographic area. (Nine separate interviews with groups of women revealed that women do not create WNCs.) Based on early qualitative findings, we designed and conducted a standardized survey with 317 household heads. We found that 46% of respondents have had WNCs. Furthermore, multivariate regression models show a significant association between WNCs and the controversial practice of leasing land in one district. Taken together, our findings show that WNCs can be seen as innovations in social networking that reduce path dependency, increase the range of potential outcomes, and hold important implications for rural livelihoods in East Africa

Experimental Validation of Specialised Questioning Techniques in Conservation

Conservation increasingly relies on social science tools to understand human behavior. Specialized questioning techniques (SQTs) are a suite of methods designed to reduce bias in social surveys and are widely used to collect data on sensitive topics, including compliance with conservation rules. Most SQTs have been developed in Western, industrialized, educated, rich, and democratic countries, meaning their suitability in other contexts may be limited. Whether these techniques perform better than conventional direct questioning is important for those considering their use. We designed an experiment to validate the performance of four SQTs (unmatched count technique, randomized response technique, crosswise model, and bean method) against direct questions when asking about a commonly researched sensitive behavior in conservation, wildlife hunting. We developed fictional characters, and for each method asked respondents to report the answers that each fictional character should give when asked if they hunt wildlife. We collected data from 609 individuals living close to protected areas in two different cultural and socioeconomic contexts (Indonesia and Tanzania) to quantify the extent to which respondents understood and followed SQT instructions and to explore the sociodemographic factors that influenced a correct response. Data were modeled using binomial general linear mixed models. Participants were more likely to refuse to answer questions asked using SQTs compared with direct questions. Model results suggested that SQTs were harder for participants to understand. Demographic factors (e.g., age and education level) significantly influenced response accuracy. When sensitive responses to sensitive questions were required, all SQTs (excluding the bean method) outperformed direct questions, demonstrating that SQTs can successfully reduce sensitivity bias. However, when reviewing each method, most respondents (59–89%) reported they would feel uncomfortable using them to provide information on their own hunting behavior, highlighting the considerable challenge of encouraging truthful reporting on sensitive topics. Our results demonstrate the importance of assessing the suitability of social science methods prior to their implementation in conservation contexts