Testing the Limits of Yourself & Your Bike Survey

Hi,

My name is Catherine and I'm currently looking for people to participate
in my research project. This project is part of my Bachelor of Arts
(Honours) in Psychology degree at Deakin University.

The project follows up a study conducted in 2008, which found that people
high in psychological need for control (people who like a lot of control
over their lives - if you like, ‘control freaks’!) were generally safer
riders. However, we unexpectedly also found that these riders reported
more performance of stunts (wheelies and wheel spins).

This study therefore aims to further explore the relationship between
safety and stunting. Are those high in need for control seeking to test
the limits of themselves and their bikes? Can stunting help you become a
safer rider?

We are therefore looking for licenced on-road motorcycle riders, who have
ridden within the last 24 months, to complete the confidential
questionnaire that makes up this project.

If you're interested in participating, or just want to find out more, then
please follow the link below:

http://fat.ly/7zz5x

 

As one of those who both answered your survey and fit the categories
above you've missed an alternative - if you're riding a sports bike
hard you can have the front lifting or be spinning the back and not be
stunting - you're just riding hard (probably a little too hard for a
public road but that's a different discussion). <Cue Gerry rant here>

JL

 

[[ Deem rant included ]]

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

Done

control-freak non-stunting betty

 

I think this survey seemed to be far less leading in the line of
questioning than the original.
One problem I do have with it though, is that the ranges of responses do
not seem to be well spread, or exhaustive.
So for the first lot of questions, the responses are

never
hardly ever
occasionally
quite often
frequently
nearly all the time

The opposite of 'never' is 'always' and there is no option to answer
that. 'Nearly all the time' would oppose 'hardly ever', not 'never'.
'Frequently' and 'quite often' are indistinguishable and so close to
'nearly all the time' that there seems to be a mass of responses at that
end of the scale where people could chose very different responses to
mean the same answer, and there is a huge gaping hole in the middle of
the responses which make it impossible to give a response which does not
appear to be somewhat polarised.

On a scale from 0 to 10, I consider that the possible responses are
0 , 1.5 , 3 , 8 , 8.5 , 9

Nev..
'08 DL1000K8

 

Aren't questions 18 and 21 a bit pointless?
ie. given you know my current age (age in 2009 also implies year of
birth)
AND given the year I got my motorcycle learners permit...
do you really need to ask how old I was in that year?

 

The one in there that irked me last time this came up was
"Please estimate your percentage of riding in the following contexts:"
Is that time or km?
I'd spend more time riding in urban environments but ride more km in
open road environments because I'm going a lot faster.
I assumed km.

 

Aren't questions 18 and 21 a bit pointless?
ie. given you know my current age (age in 2009 also implies year of
birth)


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not necesarily, but there is only a difference of one year either way
you could be 29 and born in December 1979
or you could be 30 and born in January 1979

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


AND given the year I got my motorcycle learners permit...
do you really need to ask how old I was in that year?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Probably looking at how old a person was when they started riding bikes on
the road
learners permit at 17 or 37

 

Yeah; that one got me too.
I commute about 200 days a year and I "tour" about 10 days a year but
I do more touring km than commuting km.

I hope it's not like our surveys at work where they draw really
specific conclusions from really vague questions.......

 

I thought this one was self explanatory

28. Please estimate your percentage of riding in the following contexts
(note: numbers should add up to 100%)
City traffic
Suburban/town traffic
Country open road
Off-road/trail
Track
Other


How much riding do you do in the
City traffic
Suburban/town traffic
Country open road
Off-road/trail
Track
Other

Added up should amount to 100%

 

It's not. What does the "How much" refer to?

How much time, how much distance?

I could spend an hour in peak hour traffic in Sydney and travel 10km.

I could spend an hour up the east coast of Tasmania and travel 150km.

So if I commute in Sydney every day then I'm going to spend a lot of
time on the bike but not travel many km. If I spend my time on the
road in Tassie I'm going to travel a lot of km in nowhere near as much
time. Which "much" are they referring to?

 

To give an example of what I'm getting at.

When I lived at South Arm at the mouth of the Derwent River I would
commute into Hobart every day. It was a 45km trip each way. The first
30 km was on open sweeping country roads that I would cruise at
somewhat illegal speeds. The next 10km was suburbia. The last 5km was
city traffic in what Hobart can provide as peak hour. The whole trip
would take 25-30 mins. The first 30km would take 10 minutes. The rest
of the time was spent at 60km or stationary.

So the open road "much" was either short or long. I think the answer
to that question could be skewed in their results depending on whether
people responding assume either time or distance.

 

Good point, Nev. I noticed the lack of 'always' but not thought about it
quite as far as you have.

 

My answers to those were easy
I do
60% on rural country open road
35% in town traffic
5% in City traffic

 

It never even occured to me to do the survey in time because of the
class of vehicle being surveyed.

Aircraft and water craft and earthmoving/agricultural equipment have
hour meters (so a survey would automatically use those).

Cars and motorbikes and trucks have oddometers so a survey would
automatically use those.

How on earth would one know the hours used if you didn't have an hour
meter or a log book?


G-S

 

So you assumed km too?

I still think you are missing my point.

 

On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 23:50:48 GMT, Kevin Gleeson wrote:

[...]

I'm wondering if George (the other) has ever had a puncture.

 

Love it.

Pliny (the elder) and George (the other).

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

And Gerry (the insert phrase here)?

P

 

Maybe more fitting descriptive suffixes would be George the Very Old
and George the Ancient. There would be a problem with the wisdom
that's supposed to follow on from age. With the way things are going,
in might be even more appropriate to refer to George the Amoeba and
George the Gleam in the Milkman's eye(0).