Ambiguous test:

[Cipher7071]

You know, having lived in both types of settings
(I grew up in Detroit suburbs), I can undestand the results of this poll, and actually had a pretty good idea of how it would turn out before I answered it. But, I will withhold this thought until a few more people get a chance to answer the poll.

[Fyron]

Looks like my pick if 1-2 was canceled by someone picking 2-1. Oh, that was AT. But it must have happened a second time with a different pair, because there was most certainly not a 1:1 correlation between the questions when I had answered it... and AT answered before I did. What would be a lot more useful would be a set of results that list what you chose for both answers at the same time. Perhaps a poll with the same questions, but your answer has to be "city/got shot," "city/missed," "country/got shot," or "country/missed." This way, you get accurate information, instead of all these people that did not choose based on the "average relation." As it is now, the results are fairly suspect and do not actually show anything valid. It is possible that 10 people out of the 19 that answered so far did not pick "city/got shot" or "country/missed," which was the intended correlation. It could be that there are 5 "city/missed," 5 "country/got shot" and then 9 "city/got shot" selections. There is no way to know with the current poll.

[ January 13, 2004, 17:52: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Puke]

no, technically not. but i have known enough human beings to tell you what the results are going to be. the only thing we are missing seeing is the small differences that reflect this particular group of voters.

re-arranging the questions the way you suggest will affect the way people thing about the poll. they will see both questions at once, instead of one after the other, and will then be more inclined to answer in a way that represents how they would like to think about it, rather than how they actually think. there could still be some of that happening, but people are less likely to go back and change their answer, once having read and considered the questions.

its just a flaw in the polling system.

[David E. Gervais]

I picked 1) City and 1) got shot.

But my initial reaction to question 2 was that someone 'other' than the hunter got shot. not that he shot himself.

I guess that means I'm strange.

Cheers!

[Roanon]

Originally posted by David E. Gervais:
But my initial reaction to question 2 was that someone 'other' than the hunter got shot. not that he shot himself.

I guess that means I'm strange.

Not at all. Exactly my reaction, and then I chose 1) as being slightly closer to what I thought. But still, the "correct" answer for me is missing .

[SpaceBadger]

Grammar quibble: you have hunters' (plural possessive) rather than hunter's (single possessive) making it appear that more than one hunter was involved.

It is an odd quiz. I have a hard time seeing how anyone could choose the "missed" answer, regardless of their upbringing. Missing a shot just ain't *tragic* unless it was the very Last of his ammo and he needed the meat to avoid starvation (although some folks I know who hunt might consider it tragic if they missed a buck with a nice rack, who then ran off before they could get a second shot...), but those conditions would be stretching the question quite a lot. Absent those conditions, just keep hunting and try again. For me, that left the other option as the only one that made any sense.

SpaceBadger

PS: I think I'm another one throwing off your correlation; definitely raised in the country, but see above re answer to second question.

[ January 13, 2004, 19:39: Message edited by: SpaceBadger ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

same here. my first reaction was 'shot someone' not 'got shot'.