UKC

Hi all,

Some may remember that I posted an online questionnaire in relation to research towards a Masters dissertation. The link below is the original post calling for participants.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=591384

This study was around high risk climbing behaviour and how the following may influence participation; sensation seeking, impulsivity, anxiety, death anxiety and self-efficacy.

The aim of the research was to explore gender differences.

I am happy to announce the research is now complete and the results can be found on the following link;

https://btmedpsych.wordpress.com/2015/08/28/results-on-research-into-high-r...

The results section shows the statistical data, but for a more in depth look at results you can skip to "Discussion".

Many thanks to all those who participated.

Beth

In reply to BCT:

That was some interesting reading, but the mischiveous in me couldn't help asking...

What is the use or purpose of this research?

I mean, even if the results are male/female are more/less/the same risk averse, then so what? Is there a practical use for these findings?

I'm not being overtly critical or obtuse, just honestly curious

In reply to BCT: Thanks for posting. I usually complete surveys on UKC but yours is one of the (very) few where the results have been published. Again, thanks for the link.

In reply to Mr Lopez:

As a (former) biologist, you can't predict who will find something useful in your research, or what your seemingly useless discovery will help. I vaguely remember a story about a researcher who discovered the gene for cell division after messing around with some yeast to see what it would do, which had huge knock on effects for cancer research.

In reply to Pewtle:

Yes, i had a thought around that. But if you do a research about, for example, 'which are rounder, pears or apples', and you research consists exclusively on measuring the roundness of pears and apples, the only results you'll get is:

- Apples are rounder than pears
- Pears are rounder than apples
- Pears and apples are the same roundness
- We can't establish if there are roundness differences between pears and apples

Not much scope for unexpected discoveries, is it?

In reply to BCT:

Hi Beth,

Thanks a lot for posting the results, that's very thoughtful, and not many people post them.

In reply to Mr Lopez:


In reply to BCT:

I think you can only really expect original and significant research at PhD level (which is not to say some Masters' students don't manage to do it). Unless this is a research rather than taught Masters in which case I don't know. Plus research is, as others have pointed out, a funny old thing

Good work on publishing the results though!

In reply to BCT:

Thanks for posting the results Beth.

As noted by others, we get quite a lot of undergraduate and masters students posting surveys on here. I may be corrected, but I don't think anyone else has had the courtesy to post their results subsequently. Many thanks.

Martin

In reply to BCT:

I think it is up to the student and his/her supervisors to decide on the usefulness or otherwise of the research. However I agree that we should be applauding the student for posting the results and thanking those who participated. All too often we seem to be treated as research fodder to be forgotten once the data has been collected.

I hope Beth's supervisors will take note of this, as it shows a proper and responsible approach to her research.

In reply to BCT:

Quite often it looks like students posting questionaires are completely unaware of good practice in research design and sometimes seem to be trying to get UKC to do some of their work for them. Its nice to see things done well and I'm very pleased for you and your supervisors that you managed to get it published and it is delightful that you posted back to let us know.

In reply to BCT:

Good work in posting the results.

In reply to Mr Lopez:

Measuring the roundness of apples and pears may develop a new tool for the measuring or roundness, which could be applied to other areas...

On what basis do you justify the risk scores given in table 2?

If risk is probability * consequence I'd weight these rather differently and since this is a key factor in your results they could come out rather differently!

In reply to Mr Lopez:


It's in the Conclusion:

This research has found that females who have greater experience, low anxiety around death and are confident about their perceived climbing abilities take more risks. The present study has contributed to the knowledge that those who take risks in sport are not a homogenous group, identified clear gender differences and allowed researchers to develop this knowledge further.

Fascinating stuff.