Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: freedomwarrior998
Please provide specific methodological flaws

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?

17 posted on 02/10/2011 11:58:31 AM PST by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Hodar

Ok. So you discount every single social science study that relies on self-reporting data. This would include the “studies” that purport to show that same-sex households are just as good as opposite-sex households, “studies” that show inordinate numbers of youth engage in sexually promiscuous activity, and “studies” that purport to show the ineffectiveness of drug education?

In essence, nothing in social science is good today, right? You can’t pick and choose what you like from such and discard the rest, right?


26 posted on 02/10/2011 1:33:01 PM PST by freedomwarrior998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson