Well querying it in sample sizes that are much smaller and less random than even the shoddiest academic study is, by comparison, indeed “extremely flawed”.
I said this below as well, but it’s fairly well buried now so I’ll repeat it here for others’ benefit:
Your hypothesis that any research on fear of rape will be systematically biased towards the claim that the vast majority of women are frequently, distressingly afraid of rape is strongly contraindicated by the fact that the arbitrarily-chosen (i.e., they were open access) research sources I cited at the top of this thread support the opposite conclusion.
(To clarify: I really don’t care very much about this question and as such I’m content to just go along with the rough approximations that a couple of old surveys provided. If someone was actually trying to get a really good answer I would suggest they look further and deeper. Published research would probably be a good start; given what I’ve seen so far, your hypothesis that it’s systematically and hopelessly biased to the point of uselessness is not persuasive)
Um… the particular method you suggested is an extremely flawed research strategy. Especially considering that one of your complaints about the research linked by Vulture was that the sample may not be representative. I don’t know about you, but the women I know well do not constitute a particularly representative sample of women in general.
Describing your experiment as “directly querying the reality surrounding you” makes it sound pretty dandy, but if you actually look at the specifics of the experiment, it’s subject to a host of biases.
It’s interesting that you seem to think that almost every source is likely to be biased… in the exact opposite direction from the results of the two arbitrarily-chosen sources above!
Yes.
P.S. I do love how directly querying the reality surrounding you is described as an “extremely flawed research strategy” X-D
Well querying it in sample sizes that are much smaller and less random than even the shoddiest academic study is, by comparison, indeed “extremely flawed”.
Well their not systematically biased, unlike the samples that someone with an agenda is likely to use.
I said this below as well, but it’s fairly well buried now so I’ll repeat it here for others’ benefit:
Your hypothesis that any research on fear of rape will be systematically biased towards the claim that the vast majority of women are frequently, distressingly afraid of rape is strongly contraindicated by the fact that the arbitrarily-chosen (i.e., they were open access) research sources I cited at the top of this thread support the opposite conclusion.
(To clarify: I really don’t care very much about this question and as such I’m content to just go along with the rough approximations that a couple of old surveys provided. If someone was actually trying to get a really good answer I would suggest they look further and deeper. Published research would probably be a good start; given what I’ve seen so far, your hypothesis that it’s systematically and hopelessly biased to the point of uselessness is not persuasive)
Um… the particular method you suggested is an extremely flawed research strategy. Especially considering that one of your complaints about the research linked by Vulture was that the sample may not be representative. I don’t know about you, but the women I know well do not constitute a particularly representative sample of women in general.
Describing your experiment as “directly querying the reality surrounding you” makes it sound pretty dandy, but if you actually look at the specifics of the experiment, it’s subject to a host of biases.
It’s interesting that you seem to think that almost every source is likely to be biased… in the exact opposite direction from the results of the two arbitrarily-chosen sources above!