UKH

It's that time of the year again, so in the interests of not getting endlessly flamed for stupid mistakes, how about some tips for these surveys?

1 proof read

2 proof read

3 proof read

Now that's out of the way...

Get some people - friends, family, your boy/girl friend to try it out first. Does it work, do the questions make sense? Does it answer your research question

Do a forum search - is this the same question everyone asked last year, 'cos it gets boring answering the same old cliches, and you might get more interest if it's a bit more original.

Any other ideas?

In reply to toad:

Its often difficult to proof read your own text, so get one of your fellow students to proof read for you (you can in turn read their questionnaire)

In reply to toad:

However much you love climbing you really don't have to dream up an improbable reason to incorporate into your thesis .

In reply to timjones:

Absolutely, although a lot of them are doing sports/ recreation degrees. Actually it's a good thing to turn away from what you already do to a new subject for your dissertation. It avoids it all feeling a bit stale.

In reply to toad:


As someone who works professionally with spelling and grammar - the reading of proofs, often referred to as proofreading - I'm often amused by the fact that most pedants aren't actually that hot when it comes to spelling, grammar, and syntax. In your case, I'd say that the old idiom about glass houses certainly rings true; if you'd like a quotation for future posts, do get in touch.

In reply to Valkyrie1968:

My degree isn't dependant on the quality of my writing (well, it was, but that's in he past). I don't really care in a social media context (though I'm always happy to jump on a pedantry bandwagon if it rolls through the forums), I care if someone is trying to persuade strangers to contribute to their work out of the goodness of their hearts and that work isn't up to snuff.

In reply to timjones:

Don't label an undergrad dissertation a thesis.

In reply to toad:

I become unreasonably enraged by poor surveys. Amusingly YouGov, used by government to shape policy, are some of the worst!

Anyway, before I begin to rant, my suggestion is that survey-writers work out in advance exactly how they need to slice the data gain the insights that they are looking for, and then design the survey (or other research method) to ensure they're gathering that data. Getting all your results and then discovering it doesn't answer your questions is a right pain.

In reply to rj_townsend:


This doesn't surprise me:
If the labour party had a policy to slaughter 10% of all children at birth, would you approve or disapprove?

Conclusion:
98% of the population disapprove of labour's policies.

Slightly tongue in cheek....

In reply to toad:

Get someone who knows a fair bit about the subject of the survey to read through it and point out inconsistencies, built in bias, non-sense questions and questions that are vague to the point of un-answerable. The built in bias is the main fault with most surveys, they seem to be designed not to gather new data, but to confirm a pre-conceived idea.

In reply to Valkyrie1968:

Printing out does wonders for proofing, there is just something about text on a screen that allows your eyes to skim over glaring mistakes.

In reply to toad:

As someone who is dyslexic I probably miss most mistakes in posts, and make plenty of my own - even when I read what I write three times.

I do find it interesting that some of those that comment on the odd there rather than a their, use power, energy and force interchangeably. I'd ask, which is the greater sin? Ditto naming the wrong mountain? Or spelling the name of the right mountain incorrectly?

Re the surveys. I blame the universities (I work in one). Most of the surveys posted don't look like they have been put together in way I would expect, by people who have read any of the standard texts on how to do so, possibly without a hypothesis, or a pilot study, or any thought about the statistical methods that will be applied etc. The fact that they are not using a random sample of climbers, but rather a highly biased set - those can be bothered to reply - possibly makes their work invalid anyhow. Hence, if you want to help them get through their dissertation, reply; if you think anyone is going to learn anything about the subject of the survey from such a survey, I'd be more cautious.

In reply to ianstevens:


Who specified that we were talking about undergrad dissertations?

In reply to Valkyrie1968:


Cn you check my post. please.

My favourite grammtical things are full stops, capital letters and oxford commers.

In reply to Valkyrie1968:


And, despite being a mere amateur, I get quite distressed by hyphens (-) substituting for en (–) or em (—) dashes...

In reply to bouldery bits:


How about Oxford coppers and missing coats

In reply to toad:
Don't assume every climber thinks in the terms you do.

Some of us don't do "mindfullness", aren't obsessed with "equality", don't "partake in disciplines", some of us aren't constantly looking to take offense at things, and aren't interested in climbing outside of it being a fun way to spend a day out with our mates.

In reply to toad:


They are students and still learning. Of course what they produce won't be perfect in many cases. It should be of a minimum standard in terms of clarity, for ethical reasons, but it's an educational exercise. Why would you expect all students to produce work of a professional standard? If everyone got a first for their dissertation then something would be wrong with the system.

In reply to cathsullivan:

If everyone got a first for their dissertation then something would be wrong with the system.

It's a different subject entirely, but particularly since the introduction of high fees.........







Something is wrong with the system

In reply to toad:

But there would be something even more wrong with it if we assumed that all students should produce work that is of the highest standard all the time!

The work they produce will vary and we all learn best when we are allowed to repeatedly produce imperfect efforts and gain feedback.

In reply to cathsullivan:
Oh, agreed entirely, although by dissertation time, it isn't really about learning. Those mistakes should have been made already. This is a final piece of work that is usually a significant chunk of your final degree mark.

In reply to toad:

Of course it's still about learning when you do your dissertation. It's lifelong learning innit!

And, yes, it is usually a big contributor to the final degree mark. But those do vary quite a lot. Some people excel, while others barely pass. This is entirely normal.

In reply to timjones:


Well most of them, especially the bad ones that could benefit from tips, typically are

In reply to ianstevens:


According to my dictionary an undergrad dissertation is a form of thesis?

In reply to toad:

If you ask me about my attitide to risk-taking, I am liable to tie your survey monkey's arms around your neck and pull until it strangles you.

If you try and categorise me as a thrill seeker, I'll cut out the middle man and strangle you myself.

In reply to nniff:

Or just don't fill out the survey? I do find it strange how folk get so hot and bothered about these things.

In reply to Michael Gordon:
Because, working in university education, I am usually happy to invest five minutes to help a student add a data point to their survey, but often despair at what passes for research these days?

CB


edit: and to add to cathsullivan's point above: yes, the thesis is part of the exam and part of learning. The crap statistics, bad sample selections, dependent parameters, etc., are IMO more an indictment of the courses taught and possibly the lecturers doing the teaching, rather than the students trying to finish their (pointless) degree.

In reply to toad:


1. Do not try to write your own questionnaire(s): find one in the relevant literature, because [1] questionnaire construction is a highly technical job, and [2] previous used and published questionnaires will have had their reliability tested.
2. Make sure the questionnaire matches your research questions - adapt the questionnaire as and if necessary.
3. Subjects might not have an opinion on the questionnaire topic; however, they are still likely to "tick one of the boxes" if you ask them to. This is the problem of manufactured responses.
4. Questionnaire instructions must be very clear.
5. Questions must not be imprecise, unclear, unfair, or leading.
6. Questionnaire choices offered must match subjects’ true feelings.
7. The questionnaire must measure what it is supposed to measure: the questions themselves may predetermine what you actually find, and subjects may suddenly acquire attitudes they did not previously possess.

Procedure for conducting survey / questionnaire research: Decide what question you wish to investigate. Decide exactly what will constitute data on your research question. Find / adapt a questionnaire suitable for investigating your question. Choose / adapt your questionnaire(s) with great care - it must be linked to, and answer, your research questions; make sure the whole questionnaire sticks to the topic and does not digress or ask irrelevant questions; make sure that each question is clear, unambiguous, and asks only one question; make sure the instructions are clear; adjust the scales if necessary, e.g. change a 3-, 4-, or 6-point scale to a 5-point scale.

In reply to toad: yeah but not just proof read but actually trail / test on real people as part of your survey design process

In reply to Michael Gordon:

I get hot and bothered by these things because one sets out to try and help somebody and then finds that you've been presented with ill-considered tripe that attempts artificial categorisation of the characteristic under investigation and which rarely aligns with your own outlook. And repeat.

In reply to cb294:

>The crap statistics, bad sample selections, dependent parameters, etc., are IMO more an indictment of the courses taught and possibly the lecturers doing the teaching, rather than the students trying to finish their (pointless) degree.

I think it's also about what counts as a passing standard.

In reply to David Coley:

Well said David. I'd also point out to the OP its not 'that time of year' (its late for most research for undergrad dissertations).

My advice to those posting surveys here in the future is to read up from the many excellent texts on how to design them properly and be clear in your aims when you post here and respond to us with your conclusions when you have finished. I simply won't bother with a survey that is badly designed and those who produce the better surveys too often don't post back.

In reply to toad:

1. Don't assume that all climbers climb indoors, or go bouldering, or sport climb, or train. When asked how often I do any of these, there is never a 'never' option.
2. All questionnaires ask how long I've been climbing, the last option is usually "more than 10 years" - when it should go up to "more than 50 years".

What was the question?"

In reply to Offwidth:
I have a sneaking suspicion that some of the very poor ones we occasionally see on here are people with a looming deadline and no data. A quick questionnaire might just about get you enough responses to bang something off before the deadline.

In reply to toad:



I suspect that's true .. especially if they're doing it now.