Unfortunately I couldn't get past question 1 because it's a multiple choice question asking about frequency of an activity, and it doesn't have interval classes covering all possible answers.
 To the OP - please take this as constructive criticism. Somewhere between "every day" and "every other day" you've got a very major group of runners who train frequently (i.e. 5 or 6 days a week, possibly being very particular about having a scheduled rest day), whose opinions you no doubt want to canvass. Maybe I'm being pedantic and I should just tick the one that most closely applies, but it's not a good start to the survey.
not miserable, just suffering from respondent fatigue, and frustrated by not having the option to respond accurately. I'm a researcher by trade - when your potential respondents give you constructive criticism, it's usually better to act on it rather than lash out at them.
If you're feeling a bit anti survey at the mo how about this one I received by email via our club website.
Has your club received any grants and if so who from? how much was it for? what did you use it for?have you received and loans? if so was it from a member or a supporter or a finacial institution? how much was it for and what did you use it for? do you have membership? if so how much? have you received any lottery funding? do you have any sponsors? who from? How much and what did you use it for?what do you put your money towards? Does your club sell any merchandising? And do you make any profit on it? Do you charge any fees for matches that are played? does your club organise any fund raising events? does your club receive any private investment or donations? how much for? how often? who from?
That's the entire text of the email - no name, no organisation, no explanation of why the info is being requested or what it would be used for. The reply address was a no-name Hotmail account.I may not reply to that one either.
oi.you wrote (see)
Wow, aren't you a nippy wee sweety? Word to the wise Kate, if you've built a survey and recieve constructive critisism (which the above is, as opposed to outright rudeness) you would be well advised to act on it!
I also think your survey is a bit too basic for a forum full of diversity such as RW, might be worth re-jigging it to allow for a more full answer from the respondent.
PhilPub wrote (see)
"Somewhere between "every day" and "every other day" you've got a very major group of runners who train frequently (i.e. 5 or 6 days a week, possibly being very particular about having a scheduled rest day), whose opinions you no doubt want to canvass. Maybe I'm being pedantic and I should just tick the one that most closely applies, but it's not a good start to the survey."
I'm afraid that I could not respond to the survey as it was totally mixed up.
It just doesn't apply to my exercise.
Bear in mind that these people did you the courtesy of opening and trying to complete your survey - so were trying to help.
Some of the comments may have been a little abrasive, but did address genuine issues with the survey. I'd advise you to take the suggestions on board, rewrite the questionnaire, and try again.
I actually did the survey because I wanted to see how bad it was after the comments. I said I exercised everyday, it didn't state what type of exercise counted, to some getting out of bed, walking down the stairs and making a cuppa is exercise!
The partner question and answers were very bizarre and lacking choices, just because someone doesn't run with a partner doesn't mean they run alone and by partner do you mean training partner or relationship partner? I run in a group but not with a partner as such Sometimes I run alone, there wasn't an option in your survey for how I train!
Likewise the question about training outdoors had some very odd choices!
Would be interested to find out what the purpose of the survey was, I would imagine that the answers gained for it would be vague and misleading and it would need to be much more focused to be of any use at university
Dear Kate Gardener 5 - ever heard the saying before, "Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer!"
If you want to get on in the world, you need to deeply understand how to communicate with people. People collectively over an internet forum don't have mood swings. The only factor of significance here is how you requested help and the quality of the design of your survey.
It's lazy to imagine that there's something wrong with your respondents and not accept any responsibility for the way they reacted.
And your survey could be used to teach a class on how NOT to write a survey. It really is very bad and poorly thought out. As an example. Say I ticked several of the options under this question:
What could you conclude about my input? Would they be positive reasons or negative reasons? You'd have no idea how to interpret the input so it would be utterly impossible to use collected data to draw any conclusions. I'm not being grumpy or testy, just logical. Like the earlier posters.
I mentioned this briefly in my class today (more on that later, can you tell who has just signed up to a flipping new post grad course after nearly twenty years) - apart from anything this survey really should have detailed some ethical guidelines etc - particularly if it is for a university.
I never made it past the first screen but if nothing else it really did show me what not to do.
(By the way, I'm doing an MSc Sports & Exercise Psychology - its my version of a constructive mid-life crisis - so anyone got any suggestions of areas to look into from the point of view of a runner, then do let me know).
GTC wrote (see)
How about - the psychology of people taking up running in later years and whether their new hobby is symptomatic of having a constructive mid-life crisis?
Visit the official Runner's World page
Follow Runner's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
Run For Charity
About Runner's World
Runner's World is a publication of Hearst Magazines UK which is the trading name of The National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.
Website powered by: Immediate Media Company Ltd. | © Runner's World 2002-2013 |