UKC

Hi there,

I hope this is the appropriate platform to be posting this on, I am a master student currently researching climbing motivations. I am interested all climbing abilities so if you could spare a few minutes to fill out my survey that would be fantastic. The survey will ask about the grade you climb at, your climbing confidence, your motivations behind climbing and how adventurous you are. It would be a massive help to my research if you were able to complete the survey.

It is also important you select all the consent items on the first page as without your consent I am unable to use your data in the research.

Please follow the link below

http://staffordshire.eu.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_6KhsUJBTLOZBgix

Thank you very much for your help!

In reply to beckyhaslam:

Interesting that for a survey about how adventurous you are, the questions are aimed at indoor climbers.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

Done, good luck.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

Done

In reply to Oceanrower:

That is an interesting point. How would you improve the survey, what angle would you take? Thank you for your feedback.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

I read it as being designed for sport climbers (hence the grades). Having trad grades could be useful?

In reply to Oceanrower:


Didn't see anything that implied that. What bits were you seeing that I didn't?

In reply to Willi Crater:

Questions aimed at top top and leading grades rather than trad and sport or leading and seconding. Seemed odd to me.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

Done your survey, looks interesting. Can you please commit to posting the results, either a link to the report, or even just a summary of the findings.
I notice many requests for surveys to be completed, but not many links to the conclusions. - Maybe I just miss them.
Seems only fair, as at work I'd have got a brew and half a pack of biscuits out of you for helping out.

In reply to Oceanrower:

and all about training, training, training. I've never purposefully trained in 15 years of climbing, why not ask us why we are motivated to climb?

In reply to beckyhaslam:

really can't see the relevance of the top grade that I can toprope at. I'm a lead climber, TR is just for practicing moves or bulk training. Also why no + grades? And the why do you climb section misses out entirely the reason I do it - for that amazing sense of achievement when a project finally goes down.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

I see your point. I think when designing the study I used only those grades for two reasons. Firstly, I am trying to establish whether people new to climbing versus people who have been climbing for years have different motivations. I feel the inclusion of the trad grades would have been beneficial to the experienced climbers, but perhaps dawning to new comers?

Secondly, including both types of grading may have added to the complexity of the statistically analysis. I am assessing climbing ability, climbing confidence, sensation seeking behaviour and the experience of flow as factors in mediating motivation. Adding another grading type might over complicate things?

However, thank you for your comments, all of this feedback will help me to build a discussion when I write up the report and aid further research.

In reply to markAut:

Hi there, I am sorry I can't give you any biscuits! If I were conducting this research face to face I would come prepared!

Thank you for participating and when I have written up the report I will post the results of course. The initial report will be quite bulky, but in the summer I will have the opportunity to write a publishable version which will condense the findings.

In reply to hms:

Hi there,

As I mentioned in a previous comment I am interested in all climbing abilities, people just starting out obviously won't be jumping up walls on lead. I can appreciate it is frustrating for someone of your level though, thank you for your participating anyway, it is very much appreciated.

The Sport Motivation Scale aims to assess a person's motivation into two different types; intrinsic and extrinsic. Although the scale may have not directly given you the chance to express your reason, "amazing sense of achievement" you have in fact just described intrinsic motivation. Being motivated to perform a task becoming of a personal sense of achievement or satisfaction. Thus I would imagine your results would indicate you are highly intrinsically motivated to climb?

In reply to beckyhaslam:
The section with wild parties whilst flying a small plane with a bunch of unpredictables over a culturally different country,. It seems to be focused on people who do not have much life experience, and would like to do stuff, rather than asking what people have done (or do) , which I find a better marker.

In reply to Orgsm:

Hi there,

The section you're talking about is the Sensation Seeking Scale I gather? The scale was actually designed by a psychologist called Zuckerman.
Here's a link to a bit of info on it: http://chirr.nlm.nih.gov/sensation-seeking.php

I can understand your query, the wording does imply that, however I think it is worded like that to include more people. When I testing the scale out on my self I experienced the same issue. In response to the items I had already done, I simply answered with a strong agreement.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

I gave up page 2 or 3, agree or disagree, how about a I simply don't care option.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

I think you've missed a huge opportunity in your research with this. If I had to choose between sport or trad to investigate/study confidence, sensation, ability, risk etc, trad grades would highlight peoples headspace and flow much more IMHO.

Also %'s I feel are skewed as I top rope more due to the availability of a climbing wall, but hands down I would choose a long exposed multi pitch route every time if I could.

However, survey done. Good luck with the research

In reply to beckyhaslam:

So if I am an adventurous person primarily motivated by cake does that mean I am a sensation seeker seeking the sensation of eating cake, or do I have extrinsic motivation because the cake is outside of me and if so does the cake become intrinsic motivation after I eat it?

In reply to Derry:

Why would a different grading scale highlight differences more? I can't see that at all. Some people only trad climb and some only climb sport but most climbers climb indoors these days so most will be familiar with sport grades. And anyone who knows both can easily convert from one to the other anyway. 6b = E2, 6c = E3 etc.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

Sorry, I lost interest at Q9, specifically the "if I was in the Army..."

In reply to stp:

Some people only trad climb and some only climb sport but most climbers climb indoors these days so most will be familiar with sport grades. And anyone who knows both can easily convert from one to the other anyway. 6b = E2, 6c = E3 etc.

Seriously? I would argue that some climb trad, most of these would also climb sport, and nearly all of these would climb indoors. Hard trad climbers (of which I'm not) have more 'flow' and potential sensationalism seeking due to the potential consequences. You cannot compare an E9 to an e.g. 9a and especially not an indoor grade

In reply to Derry:

You're talking about serious routes now rather than trad routes. The majority of trad routes are no more dangerous than the average sport route. And you certainly can't work out the seriousness of route from the E grade alone. Some routes get E for effort rather than seriousness. An E6 6a could be extremely serious or very sustained with no rest or even a bit of both.

At the upper end of trad grades routes do tend to be serious but firstly relatively few climbers do these and possibly none that are replying to a thread on UKC. Secondly these are often done in headpoint style which confuses the difficulty even more. Steve Mac said after doing that E10 at Pembroke that he didn't really consider it trad climbing and other climbers doing hard headpoints have suggested using a different grading system, like H grades instead of E grades.

I suppose the survey could have asked about one's hardest headpoint but I think that would rule out most of the potential respondents. The vast majority of climbers I see climbing seem to prefer safe routes whether sport or trad.

In reply to stp:


I'm not sure about the idea of converting sport and trad grades in this context. I think that the motivations for climbing in different styles is varied. Abbing in to some loose sea cliff horrorshow to climb a route that is either success or total epic/really bad outcome has totally different motivation to rocking up for session 173 on a 6 bolt project or 5 move boulder. Psychologically, I think they're very different activities. Not so at an accessible trad crack pitch, which might share similar motivation to sport climbing.

Quite challenging to capture this in this research (but without wanting to sound overly critical) at Masters level I think this should at least be discussed, if not part of the quantitative analysis.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


I totally agree with that. But I think those who do the epic loose horrorshow tend to do so only on occasion and most of the time do relatively safe routes like everyone else. Like most climbers these days they may also climb indoors during the winter so I think the sport grade is most useful in this context. It just gives a good indication of overall ability.

In reply to stp:


Not sure about that. I know a good few experienced trad climbers who climb E3s on sea cliffs but can't climb harder than 6b+ indoors. On the other hand, many who climb 6b+ can't climb a grit VS (and probably wouldn't be up for a trip down Carn Gowler) so it only really tells you what you can climb indoors (or sport after a few sessions outside).

In reply to stp:


Yes of course its about the seriousness of the route. We could disagree forever about sport vs trad but the fact of the matter is you have a different mindset with a trad route. Unknown gear placements compared to counting bolts makes it a mental game instead of a physical one, which is what the research is about.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

I think its natural to climb a bit harder on that which your most familiar with. It's also normal to drop one's grade when climbing in new area on an unfamiliar rock type, until you get used to it at least. I suspect nearly all of us would have drop several grades if faced with a Yosemite slab or offwidth for instance.

In reply to Derry:


You think sport climbing isn't a mental game???

In reply to stp:


True, but I'm questioning the validity of trad-indoor conversion. IME an E2 climber might climb indoors anywhere from 6b to 7b.

In reply to stp:


(Sigh) yes of course. Its completely mental

In reply to Derry:

I am really interested in your comment about how hard trad climbers experience more flow and express more sensation seeking tendencies. Could you expand on this? I'd like to include this in my report.

In reply to stp:

Could you explain the terminology 'head point style'? The term is new to me, but sounds very interesting and worth mentioning in the report.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

I really like your comparison of climbing styles and the motives behind them. I agree, this should be discussed. Would you say then, using your example of a sea cliff climb, that these climbers would be classed as higher sensation seekers than sport climbers?

In reply to Derry:

I like this comment about comparing different mindsets and the differences between a mental game and physical one. Definitely needs a mention in the report!

In reply to beckyhaslam:

yhm

In reply to Jon Stewart:


I think the only way someone who can climb 7b indoors could only E2 outdoors would have to be zero experience of outdoor climbing. I've never come across anyone like that myself. Most people I know who climb 7b have usually climbed for years and have experience in a wide range of climbing styles.

I imagine that a person like that would very quickly accelerate up the trad grades with just little bit of practice. Within say a couple of weeks of outdoor trad climbing, I would expect such a person would probably be climbing much closer to E5 than E2 unless they had some kind of learning difficulty. It seems to me that learning to place gear and/or adjust to a different style climbing is a much faster process than building up one's overall climbing ability.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

Headpointing is where, on a dangerous route, a climber pre-practices the climb first on top rope prior to leading. They will usually know all the runner placements too. Because the route is dangerous this makes a huge difference to the difficulty of the climb if compared to a normal 'ground up' trad ascent. In fact many of the harder 'trad' routes have never actually been climbed ground up.

In terms of 'flow' it could be argued that its easier to achieve flow on heavily pre-practiced routes (whether sport or trad) because you don't have to work out the moves. With a lot of pre-practice its possible to know every move so well you do them almost automatically. The part of the mind used to figure out moves can therefore be switched off and you're just focused on movement. However I'm not saying this is the case. Its certainly possible to achieve flow on onsight (ground up) climbing too.

Whether one style of climbing is better for 'flow' than another is an interesting question.

In reply to stp:


I can't remember if we're talking about redpointing rather than onsighting 7b or whether we haven't specified? Was it specified in the survey? Those that can redpoint 7b (indoors or out) but climb E2 on trad are pretty much everywhere. I agree that if you can onsight 7b then you're more likely to be trad climbing at higher grades, and probably more likely to be experienced in different styles.


I think what more often happens is that they just don't like trad climbing and don't practice and don't get good at it.


For sure. Often makes me smile when people make out that placing gear is an art that takes years of experience, it's pretty simple. I guess that a 7b onsight climber should be able to make it to E5 in a couple of weeks if they haven't already. But someone who redpoints a 7b into submission over the course of several months - and this is what their climbing experience is made up of - might well find E2 their limit, especially on intimidating crags.

Either way, there's no way on earth I'd go out climbing with an indoor 6b climber and assume they'd be OK on E2s!

In reply to stp:


In my experience I've definitely found I'm more likely to get into a flow state on redpoint than on onsight, especially onsight trad where there is more nervousness/uncertainty. When I have achieved it on trad routes it's often been on bold climbing, where I'm not faffing with gear.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


Yup, that's almost me. I love trad climbing but I just don't do it that often, especially compared to sport redpointing. I manage to scrape up the odd E3 but lack of trad mileage means I'm not as slick or as confident as I'd need to be to get up harder stuff more regularly (or more to the point, to actually try harder stuff rather than my E2 comfort zone). When I did Fantasia last year I spent about 3 hours on the main pitch and only got up it due to being reasonably fit whereas with more trad cunning I could have been less fit/strong (and probably not horribly sunburnt my poor partner).

In reply to beckyhaslam:

Yes. But bear in mind that it's quite subtle and all about sliding scales. Lots of sport climbers also really like some trad sea cliffs like Huntsman's Leap; this is a crag that once you get into it is actually quite 'sporty' because it's single pitch and many of the routes aren't very bold. On the other hand, you get sea cliffs that only particularly perverse trad climbers ever visit, because they're completely terrifying since they're like climbing on a 300ft wall of broken biscuits Craig Doris (I haven't climbed there!). I think if you survey a climber at Doris, you'll find they're probably high sensation seekers, but down at the Leap you'll get some who are more motivated by the aspects of climbing found in sport and indoors.

There's a bit more to it that just sea cliff or sport. If you could survey climbers at different crags on their personality types there would be correlations (and lots of cross-over). The (few) people down at Carn Gowla are a bit of different bunch to those at Raven Tor (Miller's Dale) and different again to Birchen Edge.

Trouble is, people are so complex that if you lump all 'climbers' together to analyse their characteristics, you'll find lots of different groups within that with their own average characteristics. And if you go for 'trad climbers' and 'sport climbers' you'll find different groups within that. Finding a sensible way to carve people up into analysable groups is a difficult task!

In reply to climbingpixie:

That's a really good point. I suppose these are certain things in climbing that break one's flow. Fiddling with gear placements is certainly one. Also climbing where its really hard to work out what to do. You have to stop, feel around, figure out the exact sequence. With redpointing of course you know that in advance. So perhaps flow is large part of the attraction of hard redpoint and bold route climbing then?

Interestingly indoor climbing tends to be much more obvious than outdoor so that might make it better for flow too.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

Done.

In reply to stp:


Not entirely convinced by that argument. With outdoor climbing, often you have more options than the set series of indoor holds so you can make a flow that works for you. Indoors, it's OK if you have similar body characteristics to the person doing the route-setting but if you are majorly different in flexibility, reach or strength then you have to figure out alternative ways to get up which the route might not be set up for, and that can require taking time out in the middle of the route to think what to do.

In reply to stp:




Hi. I've lead 7a+ indoors and at best lead E1 trad. I don't think I have learning difficulties, e.g. I am able to understand the difference between falling off 2 metres onto a bolt and 12 metres into the floor (which I have come close to doing on trad more than once). Hence trad is a far more psychological game with more focus and flow

Perhaps you should rock up to an E5 and see how you get on

In reply to beckyhaslam:

I really think you should do some qualitative/mixed methods if you want to have a clue what actually motivates us

In reply to trouserburp:


Perhaps you should try better protected trad routes? There are plenty of them.

Many 7a+ leaders will be doing E5. It's not a case of simply rocking up but clearly the potential will be there and a concerted effort to work up through E1, E2, E3, E4 will likely see positive results.

In reply to trouserburp:

Where are you climbing? How much experience do you have of outdoor routes?

For me pretty much every trad area I've visited most of the trad routes are perfectly safe whether they're E1 or E5. Some routes are runout in places, but often the crux is not. But routes where you'd deck it from hard climbing are uncommon (an exception being the harder grit routes).

You should be able to climb much harder so long as you're competent at placing gear. Do you have a decent rack? Many E5s wouldn't even be 7a+. Right Wall, for instance, would be no more than 6c as a sport route.

In reply to stp:

have you ever actually climbed trad?

In reply to stp:


That's not my experience at all. Truer in Pembroke than most places - although there are still plenty of routes where in the lower parts you could break your ankles before you get good gear, or the first runner isn't well positioned for hard moves.

Absolutely untrue on grit - if you want safe, you have to choose your route carefully. Absolutely untrue at Gogarth too, especially South Stack. Most mountain trad areas have a good mix of bold and safe routes, but 'safe' routes require a lot of additional strength and endurance above the french grade to actually make them safe. If you're wobbling up at your limit on a pumpy route, then you may or may not be placing plenty of solid gear.

The idea that "most trad routes are perfectly safe" simply isn't true. Some trad routes can be made perfectly safe, so long as you have enough in reserve.

In reply to stp:

Your own profile doesn't really seem to back up the position you are taking on this. Lots and lots of sport well into the 7s (nice going btw) with a much smaller number of trad routes, mostly in the lower grades with the odd E1 thrown in.

In reply to Jon Stewart:
I think there is a big distinction between bold and dangerous routes. The former can just mean runout and scary with a big but safe fall. The latter are those where you are going to hurt yourself badly if you fall from the hard climbing. I don't really include the easier climbing because a competent climber won't fall off sections that are significantly easier.


Well I agree with that but in my mind if you're skipping runners because you're so pumped and then continue running it out facing a potential ground fall then that's incompetence at best, though I think the word 'idiocy' is more applicable. Sooner or later a climber like that is going to have a nasty accident.

And this doesn't mean the route is dangerous, only that the climber attempting it is.

In reply to Willi Crater:

Most of my trad climbing is not in my profile because I did it years ago, before sport climbing even existed and I either don't have a record of it or can't be bothered to put it in. I've climbed bold trad routes up to E6.

In reply to stp:

I think there's a lot of danger to be had in taking big falls off trad routes that doesn't involve hitting the ground. If it's a big fall, it's dangerous - a large proportion of falls I've had/seen/held involved the climber inverting, and a couple have involved in a bruised and shaken-up climber. If you take a big fall on a trad route, you'll hopefully be fine, but I don't think it's sensible to take the attitude that it's safe. Often the situation will be a reasonable fall above your last runner, but that runner might be imperfect (it could be an old peg), so a right whipper if it fails. And you're not likely to get a nice dynamic belay when your belayer's strapped to the crag.


All it takes is for the last runner to fail and the fall could be a big one resulting in injury. Loads of routes have fiddly gear that's difficult to make it really solid. You don't have to be totally incompetent to get into a position where you're wobbling above a crap runner. The extreme you paint of facing a ground fall because you're not good enough to climb the route is - hopefully - much rarer.

I think you've rationalised the danger of trad climbing rather too far, because you don't do it any more. If you were doing a lot of trad routes, you'd realise the amount of time you spend thinking about the quality of that last runner...how solid was that flake? could it lift out? cams in limestone are a bit unpredictable...

In reply to beckyhaslam: Done.

Point of potential confusion though - you don't specify whether you are referring to UK trad technical grades or sport grades. I assumed trad grades given there were no +'s included.
I guess my assumption was wrong.

In reply to beckyhaslam:

"people just starting out obviously won't be jumping up walls on lead."

Interesting, when I started climbing I started by going out leading low grade (trad) routes and built up, experience, ability, circle of climbing partners, gear, etc. different times I guess.

i don't have any answer, please contact an expert.





-----------------------------------------
[["http://www.sitandshop.in" online shopping in bhopal]]