This is NOT a 5 minute survey. This survey pretty much defines hackers as crackers, fundamentally missing the point and the original definition. Avoid.

Also, the questions are very poorly worded and are sometimes impossible to answer because it assumes I'm doing something that I'm not. For instance:

"Have you been financially compensated in any way for participating in this project?" WTF project are you talking about here? The hypothetical project that I might work on even though it doesn't help me or my friends?

I am terribly sorry for the bugs, which are caused by the coding on the University side :(

As for the question regarding the compensation, the survey attempts to find out whether you (would) do it for money or just for the sake of programming.

It should say that then:

"Would you participate in such a project for free or would you require some kind of reward."

The biggest problem is the perpetration of the myth that hacking is "penetrating security systems". A hack is a "quick but brilliant" solution to a problem. Hackers were people that could do this over and over again.

...and it has severe bugs that wipe out past answers. I guess OP isn't much of a hacker himself :)

As I tried to take this survey, my answers would randomly change or blank out. Also, this test assumes that hacking is what people do when they break into systems.

Yup. Despite the "Definition of a hacker" question with sensible answer choices, all further questions assumed that the only answer was "a computer criminal".

I also got this result without answering "Definition of a hacker" in a way that would indicate this.

Can you explain the bug a little more. The survey is intended not to display some questions when "very unlikely" is selected. Is the behaviour any different?

The test is comprised from several other researches and attempts to segment the participant into hacker as a programmer subculture, hacker as security researcher and hacker as a the one who breaks into system.

> The test is comprised from several other researches and attempts to segment the participant into hacker as a programmer subculture, hacker as security researcher and hacker as a the one who breaks into system.

First, you don't want to say "comprised from." "Assembled from" might be an acceptable substitute.

Second, this hardly covers the many definitions for "hacker". What about "computer fanatic"? But in the final analysis, to prevent confusion, IMHO you should avoid the term "hacker" altogether. Choose a term that has fewer contradictory meanings. If you fail to clarify your intended audience, your work will end up having no meaning.

The author fails to define "hacker", a word with multiple meanings, so what's the point? He should at least clearly define his target audience.