In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
> (In reply to Fio)
>
> The big snag with the questionnaire is it seems to assume a static picture. Whereas, for example, one's attitude to risk-taking will vary with mood, weather, age etc.
True, and over time a trend emerges.
> At some stages in my life in my 20s and 30s I felt much ore inclined to take risks than others (about every 5 years I found I needed another big adrenaline buzz). Most people, as they get older, become less keen on taking risks. For a large number of us, looking back, the taking of quite big risks is something we are glad to have done, but don't see much point in repeating.
Yes, there was a free text question about changing levels of risk appetite with age and experience.
> I also am rather puzzled as to how helpful these questionnaires really are. Does one just end up with a not very revealing list of statistics, such as 23 % of climbers and adventurers like the sensation of speed ?? I would have thought that to do anything meaningful at degree level would involve doing a huge number of one-to-one interviews with activists.
What do you mean by 'activists'? Surely you want to find out what the average punter, the beginner, and the expert/obsessive do and what they feel about it?
> The written word is always so much more useful than statistics.
Not true. If you want a broad picture of a population then statistics are the best tool. If you want to find out more detail about experiences then qualitative research is better. The problem with many of the questionnaires people do are that they don't use a representative sample so they don't really achieve either. But statistics are the only way to answer questions like "why do people choose to do x, y or z". If you get a handful of in depth accounts it tells you nothing about the broad trends. I suppose with sufficient budget you could get a large number of detailed accounts that cover a representative sample, and then analyse them down into statistics to reveal the trends.
> Also, many people will come up with new, interesting ideas, and reasons why they do risky and adventurous things - much more interesting then simply ticking boxes next to someone else's rather nebulous questions. Also, any useful and interesting piece of work needs particular examples/stories etc as evidence for abstract assertions.
Yes, I agree that quantitative research should be complemented with qualitative.
> And anyhow, stories about adventures are usually a lot more interesting than academic studies about them.
Not a helpful remark. I prefer mediterranean food to Indian, but I don't go into the curry house to announce that.