Beautiful Mind
BOSTON FIGHTS DRUGS
Evaluating the screening procedure used in A case, the screening procedure that the group used had a number of flaws which may have affected the efficieny of the screening process. In general, the survey is able to deliver the expected results however in a limited fashion. As stated in the case, many volunteers were not able to interpret the questions without assistance. This is mainly caused by the ambiguity of the questions. For instance in the second question the respondents are asked to state whether they see drug use as a problem. Here, the statement “problem” is too general, it should have been explained at least briefly so that the reprensentatives could have interpreted the questions without assistance and its side effects of being possibly influenced by that assistance.
Another problem with the questionnaire was that it was possibly not able to grab the attention of the respondents. This has two possible reasons. Firstly the introductory paragraph could have better wording. Stating the payment respondents are going to receive is an advantage, but stating the aim of the questionnaire may be a possible turn off. Second and perhaps more importantly there is a problem with the order of the questions. General demographic information gathering questions should have been placed at the beginning of the questionnaire, so that they would grab the attention of the respondents as well as fitting the questionnaire in a more structural way. The flaw in this area caused almost one third of the reprensentatives to be eliminated because they did not frankly answer the questionnaire and chose to copy from another person.
In some of the questions, respondents choose their level or position in a certain subject. However the scaling in these questions is inadequate and would not able the group to gather functional quantitative data. Scaling based on a numeric base could be a better alternative. For instance, respondents could have chosen from a
Evaluating the screening procedure used in A case, the screening procedure that the group used had a number of flaws which may have affected the efficieny of the screening process. In general, the survey is able to deliver the expected results however in a limited fashion. As stated in the case, many volunteers were not able to interpret the questions without assistance. This is mainly caused by the ambiguity of the questions. For instance in the second question the respondents are asked to state whether they see drug use as a problem. Here, the statement “problem” is too general, it should have been explained at least briefly so that the reprensentatives could have interpreted the questions without assistance and its side effects of being possibly influenced by that assistance.
Another problem with the questionnaire was that it was possibly not able to grab the attention of the respondents. This has two possible reasons. Firstly the introductory paragraph could have better wording. Stating the payment respondents are going to receive is an advantage, but stating the aim of the questionnaire may be a possible turn off. Second and perhaps more importantly there is a problem with the order of the questions. General demographic information gathering questions should have been placed at the beginning of the questionnaire, so that they would grab the attention of the respondents as well as fitting the questionnaire in a more structural way. The flaw in this area caused almost one third of the reprensentatives to be eliminated because they did not frankly answer the questionnaire and chose to copy from another person.
In some of the questions, respondents choose their level or position in a certain subject. However the scaling in these questions is inadequate and would not able the group to gather functional quantitative data. Scaling based on a numeric base could be a better alternative. For instance, respondents could have chosen from a