226187 Bullies, 3930 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 1 to 10 of 21
Page 1 of 3 1 23 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. lklawson is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    964

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 9:12am


     Style: Bowie

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!

    Suggestions for constructing a valid Survey on fighting

    OK, my recent article deconstructing the "90% of all fights go to the ground" myth got me thinking. Because none of the existing data sources pass research muster, it'd be really, really nice to have one that does. The problem is, I'm not going to shell out that thousands of dollars (hundreds of thousands?) to have a Research Group run a national poll.

    So, failing that, I'm soliciting ideas for actually getting the necessary data in such a way that actually will pass muster.

    Suggestions?

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
  2. PointyShinyBurn is offline
    PointyShinyBurn's Avatar

    Gnarly King of Half-Guard

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    4,220

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 9:21am

    Join us... or die
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Survey of trial transcripts, maybe?
  3. lklawson is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    964

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 9:58am


     Style: Bowie

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Maybe. I admit that I hadn't thought of that. Unfortunately, it misses everything that doesn't go to trial or that the trial itself doesn't detail. :(

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
  4. BryanW is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    47

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 11:39am


     Style: French Smallsword

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    The reason for the question will affect the wording of the specific question and thus may affect your research methods (or narrow down your options). Personally I would do what a lot of scientists do and narrow the question at first to something easily measurable and specific. After that question is answered then look to broaden it or look at another easily measurable area before attempting to generalize.

    For example if the purpose of looking at this myth is to help train police in more effective self defense techniques then one might look analyze all police video recordings related to officer assault or response to violent situations. Then you could make a conclusion along the lines of "based on the data in X county between the time of Y and Z, fights involving police went to the ground N percentage of times".....
  5. CrackFox is offline
    CrackFox's Avatar

    You have to work the look.

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Bat Country
    Posts
    3,077

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 11:51am

    supporting member
     Style: Judo, BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I work in academia and so far one of the biggest revelations I've had in my career is that if it's not clear how you should measure something, chances are you haven't properly narrowed down what it is you want to measure.

    Get a nice specific question/hypothesis first. It's probably going to end up sounding like a very unambitious question, but it's much better to have an unambitious question you can answer than a really thought-provoking one that there is no simple answer for.

    Also, outside of a few fields, the information you get from polls is usually bullshit. Avoid polls.
  6. BryanW is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    47

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 11:59am


     Style: French Smallsword

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by CrackFox View Post
    I work in academia and so far one of the biggest revelations I've had in my career is that if it's not clear how you should measure something, chances are you haven't properly narrowed down what it is you want to measure.

    Get a nice specific question/hypothesis first. It's probably going to end up sounding like a very unambitious question, but it's much better to have an unambitious question you can answer than a really thought-provoking one that there is no simple answer for.

    Also, outside of a few fields, the information you get from polls is usually bullshit. Avoid polls.
    Agreed 100%.
  7. CrackFox is offline
    CrackFox's Avatar

    You have to work the look.

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Bat Country
    Posts
    3,077

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 12:06pm

    supporting member
     Style: Judo, BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Actually just off the top of my head. If you could get a random sample of cctv footage of street fights, you wouldn't actually need a huge number of videos to start making estimates of how often fights go to the ground. You'd need to define properly what "going to the ground" means and you'll have to make sure that sample of fights really is random.
  8. BryanW is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    47

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 12:14pm


     Style: French Smallsword

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I wouldn't do random street fights yet because of the high variability in potentially confounding factors...some have weapons...some are under the influence....some aren't. I'd think you'd need some method of control for a first question otherwise when you break down the types of fights (who was involved, types of illegal substances involved, weapons, etc) you'll find probably either high variability or lack of information.

    Also where would you get these CCTV tapes? You tube? Probably not a good idea because only certain videos are put there.

    The ultimate goal of something like this is to answer the original question of what type of martial art should a law abiding citizen or LEO study. The fights on video may encompass neither of those types. Kirk already has an article from a police standpoint, why not take that a step further first before going into more random areas? With police videos you can find out ultimately if drugs/alcohol were involved and what weapons if any were involved and you have one less variable of always having police involvement and could make a conclusion regarding encounters law enforcement might face.
    Last edited by BryanW; 1/09/2012 12:16pm at . Reason: fixed spelling
  9. lklawson is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    964

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 12:47pm


     Style: Bowie

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    That's a good point. Defining the specific question is key.

    Initially, the thought was "what percentage of fights 'go to the ground'" but I realized instantly that this was to vague. What is a fight? How is "go the the ground" defined? &tc. Of course, the point of finding out what percentage of "fights" "go to the ground" is to make an informed decision about how much priority ground-fighting should have in your personal training for Self Defense.

    As these thoughts were rattling around in my brain I also realized that I need some way to collect a statistically significant random sample of the population (in this case, the general population as a whole). All of the data collection methods that I can think of or has been suggested to date significantly filter the sample to a point where I doubt it would be representative of the population. I've had suggestions of CCTV vids, Court Documents, Arrest Records, and web surveys targeted to Martial Arts forums as well as a few other suggestions thrown in for good measure. All suffer from the same problem of not representing the general population. LEO Arrest Records only capture "fights" to which LEO's roll and make an arrest. Court Records only capture information which got to a Trial and in which the testimony is introduced to Court. Web surveys suffer from very specific targeting and Martial Artists represent a vanishingly small percentage of the population as a whole.

    How do I normalize for all of these factors, never mind getting a valid, significant, random sample?

    The best I can come up with is a phone survey, but even that has issues.

    This is why I'm asking for suggestions. :(

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
  10. CrackFox is offline
    CrackFox's Avatar

    You have to work the look.

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Bat Country
    Posts
    3,077

    Posted On:
    1/09/2012 12:59pm

    supporting member
     Style: Judo, BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Provided you have suitable randomization, a sample doesn't have to be as big as most people would think in order to be statistically significant.
Page 1 of 3 1 23 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.