Argumentum Ad Hominem. Please provide specific methodological flaws, simply trying to attack the messenger (ie: Church research) is not a logical or coherent argument.
pedantic hat on.
Actually, it’s more of a genetic fallacy than an ad hominem.
The poster was discounting the data because of its source.
Now, if he attacked the presenter of the data because he was from a church, this would be more of a circumstantial ad hominem...
/pedantry
(just havin’ a little fun with ya)
Fair enough
1. Method of asking the questions. If you ask a question that can incriminate, under what question is this question asked? Openly in a classroom, or 1:1 with a percieved 'leader' will likely give an answer that the questioner expects to hear. If you have a room with a small group, people will indicate the answer that is expected, to avoid a 'witch-hunt'.
2. Fear of reprisal. What happens or what risk is the questioner subject to? There is no perceived risk for giving the answer that the questioner wants; however giving a differing answer could cause distress (informing parents, social outcast, humiliation, ect).
3. Risk vs Reward - is there any motivation to give an answer contrary to the expected answer? What motivation is there that the youth will give an 'honest' answer instead of an answer that reflects reality.
4. Conditioning - if children are cautioned not to do something over and over; then are asked if they would do something contrary - most would say 'No'. If you tell them that stealing is wrong - over and over; and then ask them if they will steal; you will get 100% of them to say that they would 'Never' steal. Great, now leave a bowl of candy on your desk and leave the room for 5 minutes; and see what happens
5. What age group was questioned? Pre-adolscents will readily agree never to drink, smoke, chew tobacco, do drugs or have sex, shoplift or jaywalk. I offer the wildly unsuccessful and expensive program DARE as an example. The results after spending gazilloins of dollars promoting DARE showed that this program had NO EFFECT upon later drug use by teens.
Now, are you telling me that you had never thought of these possibilities?