Anchors and Survey Items

 

Anchors are the labels at the end points of a rating scale.

For example, a researcher may ask respondents to rate an item on a five-point scale of agreement ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.

The two endpoint labels, strongly disagree and strongly agree, are the anchors.

Ad

Learn more about Creating Surveys

Geoffrey W. Sutton, PhD is Emeritus Professor of Psychology. He retired from a clinical practice and was credentialed in clinical neuropsychology and psychopharmacology. His website is  www.suttong.com

 

See Geoffrey Sutton’s books on   AMAZON       or  GOOGLE STORE

Follow on    FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton    

   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton    

You can read many published articles at no charge:

  Academia   Geoff W Sutton     ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton 

CLIMATE SCIENCE and the Unscientific MIND

 

Pants on Fire 2023
Geoffrey W. Sutton & Bing AI

CLIMATE SCIENCE and the Unscientific MIND

Challenging Thoughts About Climate Science

and Psychological Explanations

 

Climate science has become a political football. The teams of political rivals seek to exploit research about climate science to score points they can trade in for political power. Their fans cheer and sneer and look for penalties.

Now a scientist seems to reveal a weakness. Good scientists can look back on their studies and those of others to identify what should have or could have been considered. It’s the never ending quest we read in scientific journals, “more research is needed.”

Patrick Brown is a climate scientist. He’s caught some attention for his opinion piece about other variables that could account for the world’s wicked wildfires. Shannon Osaka does a good job of telling the complex story in WAPO, but I’m not sure the details will change the game.

But then he changes fields to become an amateur psychological scientist. Note his musing about WHY in the quote below.

 

So why does the press focus so intently on climate change as the root cause? Perhaps for the same reasons I just did in an academic paper about wildfires in Nature, one of the world’s most prestigious journals: it fits a simple storyline that rewards the person telling it. (Brown, 2023, September 12)

In his opinion piece he refers to such actual and quasi psychological concepts such as rewards ,  “reinforcing feedback loops,” narrative, and framing. I was thinking he missed confirmation bias.   But he didn’t.  He actually uses the term and applies it to the editors and reviewers of journals.

Whether Brown’s day in the sun extends to a week or so, is speculation. He offers a bit of insight into the problem of confirmation bias—that problematic cognitive bent that influences human minds to search for evidence supporting our beliefs and ignoring contradictory evidence. I’ve seen it in political sparring, clergy sermonizing, psychological writing, and yes, even myself.

I evaluated a lot of scientists and brilliant people in my career. No matter how high the IQ scores or deserved level of prestige, their brains were not perfectly logical thinking machines. A number of biases interfere with accurate thinking.

[Read more in Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman.]

The good news is, over the long haul, science is self-correcting. By that I mean, eventually the best theories win because they account for the available evidence and lead to new discoveries some of which save lives or make the quality of our lives much better.

I’m skeptical about climate science BUT, I am skeptical about most theories. I’m skeptical about what politicians say, what clergy preach, what advertisers promote, and what I read. I do not expect certainty when it comes to scientific findings or recommendations from friends. I do like data. I appreciate evidence.

Oddly, Brown’s piece shows he’s thinking like a scientist. He’s considering other factors that could account for a phenomenon. He’s not just going against a popular narrative; he’s fighting human nature. We like simple answers and avoid ambiguity, complexity, and uncertainty. I suggest that learning to live with ambiguity, complexity, and uncertainty is a mark of maturity.

I’ll leave Brown and other climate scientists to ponder the variables relevant to explaining global warming or destructive events. When it comes to explaining why Brown or anyone else does something, I suggest we consider multiple variables as well. 

Why would anyone think Brown has explained his own behavior or that of other scientists based on his answer to the “Why” question? 

Has he really considered all the relevant variables that account for human behavior in himself, journal editors, and peer reviewers? Was he able to predict the contribution of his article to the wellbeing of humankind?

Geoffrey W. Sutton, PhD is Emeritus Professor of Psychology. He retired from a clinical practice and was credentialed in clinical neuropsychology and psychopharmacology. His website is  www.suttong.com

 

See Geoffrey Sutton’s books on   AMAZON       or  GOOGLE STORE

Follow on    FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton    

   X @Geoff.W.Sutton    

You can read many published articles at no charge:

  Academia   Geoff W Sutton     ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton 

 

Intruder Rooms- Are Your children Safe Yet?

 

Intruder Room

My wife asked our grandson about school. As part of his response, he told about the new "Intruder Room." Have you seen them?

I used to work as a psychologist in schools. You can imagine we dealt with some horrific situations. Most of us care about our children and all those fine teachers and staff trying to provide a safe learning environment. 

I've been in some schools in the past few years and I wondered how safe they would be--especially when a school shooting would hit the news.

It's a new school year now. After labor day, students and teachers ought to be engaged in learning again.

Now there's something new to learn.

How does an intruder room work? How safe is it?

I'm a bit skeptical having grown up when we were told to get under our wooden desks in case the Russians dropped a nuclear bomb on us.

I asked  Bing's chat-- here's what I got.

____________________________

An intruder room is a safe space designed to protect students and staff from an active shooter or other intruder. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has guidelines around door locking and fire alarm systems that help ensure the safety of students, teachers, and staff in the event of targeted violence threats. Starting with the 2018 edition of NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code®, the Code contains rules that allow safe door locking to prevent intruders from gaining access while ensuring that people can still readily evacuate in an emergency. Doors need to have the ability to be unlocked from outside the classroom to permit entry by staff or first responders¹.

There are also products like the Hide-Away Safe Room which can provide safe haven for students, faculty and staff in the event of an armed intruder. It installs in the front of a classroom, behind the chalkboard or whiteboard, and only takes up 19″ of floor space from the wall².

I hope this helps.

_________________________

Well, I still don't know if it will help. But I really don't want a violent assault to happen just to test the value of an intruder room.

Then, I thought about college safety. Before I retired, I taught for a dozen years.

 I found quite a list of campus safety items.

Here's a link-- too much to quote-

A School Emergency Kit Checklist - Campus Safety (campussafetymagazine.com)

I do wish everyone in school a safe and happy year!

Geoffrey W. Sutton, PhD is Emeritus Professor of Psychology. He retired from a clinical practice and was credentialed in clinical neuropsychology and psychopharmacology. His website is  www.suttong.com

 

See Geoffrey Sutton’s books on   AMAZON       or  GOOGLE STORE

Follow on    FACEBOOK   Geoff W. Sutton    

   TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton    

You can read many published articles at no charge:

  Academia   Geoff W Sutton     ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton