Everyone’s familiar with a survey. There’s some questions, you answer them, the surveyor then compiles the results and (hopefully) uses the data to make some kind of sound business decision. Inherent in that model, there need to be provisions for responses which disagree with your idea or plan. Consider this example: Should we all just jump off this cliff?
Absolutely!
Definitely!
Yeah, sure.
Yes.
What do you think the guy who has no desire to die like a mindless lemming feels right now?
In the past week, I’ve been presented with two surveys, both of which I found to be so ridiculously off-base that I had to comment to the sources saying as much. The first survey was posted as a simple poll on a website I was linked to via Twitter. Given my current distaste (to put it mildly) for the “Cash for Clunkers” legislation currently being shoehorned through Washington, you can imagine my frustration when I saw an otherwise credible website publish this poll question.
What do you think about “Cash for Clunkers?”
I think it’s good for the automakers AND the environment.
I think it’s a noble effort, even though it could do MORE for the environment.
I don’t know enough about it.
They ask what you think about the legislation, but limit you to being fully in favor of it being the salvation of our planet and economy, think it’s a “noble effort” even if it could be doing more to live up to its name, or giving any passing clueless idiot a button to press. Where’s the option for those who are actually up on the details of this legislation, how it’s flawed in nature, and another attempt by “representatives” to spend our way out of problems in this country? The choices provided in this little survey are ridiculous. You either really support it, won’t fight it, or don’t get it. Good job! Political activism at its finest!
Now, you can imagine how I might have felt after getting a survey emailed to me by my alma mater, with whom I have a loathe-hate relationship (like a love-hate relationship, save I don’t have any love for them) which was four or five pages of “put the following on order from MOST representative of (the school) to LEAST representative of (the school).” The choices were about a dozen ways to say the following:
I make a lot of money because I went to (the school).
I make more money than most because I went to (the school).
(The school) helped me find my dream job right away.
My degree has really paid off and I love (the school).
Money money money.
I am a tool.
If they wanted to get alumni opinion on their next batch of marketing propaganda, then they should have detailed the point of the survey in their email. Otherwise, to present a group of people an opportunity to share their opinion on something so important as the perceived value of the education they’ll likely be paying on for years to come, only to systematically deny them the ability to do so through the multiple choice options provided can really backfire.
What if some disgruntled alumni out there posts a snide little rant about it on his tiny blog? What if the participation ends up being low because people navigate away? What if you get a huge turn out of people telling you exactly what you want to hear and you jump head first off that cliff? What if it’s just another marketing department broadcast message that doesn’t matter anyway?
It just doesn’t make sense to present people with surveys that lack the facilities to disagree with anything. If nothing else, at least let people SKIP questions they don’t want to (or can’t) answer! Maybe someone in whatever department comissioned the survey might notice when most of the people who take the survey don’t actually answer any questions.
So my question to you: Do you think surveys should always offer a dissenting option?
“So my question to you: Do you think surveys should always offer a dissenting option?”
Nope. The nature of any survey is typically to gauge public opinion about a certain subject, it's rarely to be used in any way other than to say “people LOVE this, or people love this, or they don't care.” Offering a contrasting opinion is rarely the goal of a poll. So should they? Nope. Would it be nice? Honestly, it'd be annoying. When someone is shoving a survey into my face, I really am not looking to engage them in debate.
Just my two cents. Should I:
a) shove it b) shove it HARD c) waffle cones bitch! d) get with the shoving
http://www.endlessmonkeys.info Endless Monkeys
“So my question to you: Do you think surveys should always offer a dissenting option?”
Nope. The nature of any survey is typically to gauge public opinion about a certain subject, it's rarely to be used in any way other than to say “people LOVE this, or people love this, or they don't care.” Offering a contrasting opinion is rarely the goal of a poll. So should they? Nope. Would it be nice? Honestly, it'd be annoying. When someone is shoving a survey into my face, I really am not looking to engage them in debate.
Just my two cents. Should I:
a) shove it b) shove it HARD c) waffle cones bitch! d) get with the shoving
I’m Taking a Survey… On Surveys.
Everyone’s familiar with a survey. There’s some questions, you answer them, the surveyor then compiles the results and (hopefully) uses the data to make some kind of sound business decision. Inherent in that model, there need to be provisions for responses which disagree with your idea or plan. Consider this example: Should we all just jump off this cliff?
What do you think the guy who has no desire to die like a mindless lemming feels right now?
In the past week, I’ve been presented with two surveys, both of which I found to be so ridiculously off-base that I had to comment to the sources saying as much. The first survey was posted as a simple poll on a website I was linked to via Twitter. Given my current distaste (to put it mildly) for the “Cash for Clunkers” legislation currently being shoehorned through Washington, you can imagine my frustration when I saw an otherwise credible website publish this poll question.
They ask what you think about the legislation, but limit you to being fully in favor of it being the salvation of our planet and economy, think it’s a “noble effort” even if it could be doing more to live up to its name, or giving any passing clueless idiot a button to press. Where’s the option for those who are actually up on the details of this legislation, how it’s flawed in nature, and another attempt by “representatives” to spend our way out of problems in this country? The choices provided in this little survey are ridiculous. You either really support it, won’t fight it, or don’t get it. Good job! Political activism at its finest!
Now, you can imagine how I might have felt after getting a survey emailed to me by my alma mater, with whom I have a loathe-hate relationship (like a love-hate relationship, save I don’t have any love for them) which was four or five pages of “put the following on order from MOST representative of (the school) to LEAST representative of (the school).” The choices were about a dozen ways to say the following:
If they wanted to get alumni opinion on their next batch of marketing propaganda, then they should have detailed the point of the survey in their email. Otherwise, to present a group of people an opportunity to share their opinion on something so important as the perceived value of the education they’ll likely be paying on for years to come, only to systematically deny them the ability to do so through the multiple choice options provided can really backfire.
What if some disgruntled alumni out there posts a snide little rant about it on his tiny blog? What if the participation ends up being low because people navigate away? What if you get a huge turn out of people telling you exactly what you want to hear and you jump head first off that cliff? What if it’s just another marketing department broadcast message that doesn’t matter anyway?
It just doesn’t make sense to present people with surveys that lack the facilities to disagree with anything. If nothing else, at least let people SKIP questions they don’t want to (or can’t) answer! Maybe someone in whatever department comissioned the survey might notice when most of the people who take the survey don’t actually answer any questions.
So my question to you: Do you think surveys should always offer a dissenting option?
In the glovebox: