Quick 2-3 Minute Survey on Diving & Percieved Risk

[Julia.S23]

Hello!

My name is Julia Stallings and I'm student at Virginia Tech. Currently, I'm working on a research project surrounding public perception of the risk involved in diving and other sports (for a class), and have been trying to gather more responses from people who have experience diving, as that demographic is much smaller at my school than with most other sports. If you have a few minutes and could take this really quick survey that would help so much! It should take at most 2-3 minutes, and since the questions are very broad you don't have to worry about your responses too much, it's definitely relative to the individual- here's the link:

Perceived Risk Levels in Various Physical Activities:

I'm relatively new to diving and to this forum, so if there are any recommendations you have I'd love to hear them as well!! Thank you all for your time.

 

[Lorenzoid]

First, welcome to SB!

In your survey I would suggest you define "dangerous" and "risk." To me, "risk" = probability_of_adverse_outcome x severity_of_adverse_outcome. I don't know how to interpret "dangerous." Scuba diving accidents are low probability, but when they occur the outcome can be severe. Basketball accidents are common but injuries are often mild. Which is more "dangerous"?

 

[TheRealScubaSteve]

Agree that definitions would be helpful. I answered based on probability of injury before seriousness of injury without guidance. Based on that, scuba wasn't a front runner. Good luck.

 

[Akimbo]

Scuba Diving is far too vague and broad a category. Vacation divers who are babysat by guides in less than 60'/20M of tropical water can't be compared to technical divers in 330'/100M penetrating a WWII wreck in the North Sea.

Potential danger is all about risk management. I am safer at 100M than on a skateboard in San Francisco.

 

[JMBL]

Done !

 

[Hojo in SC]

Good luck in your studies.

 

[TMHeimer]

Scuba Diving is far too vague and broad a category. Vacation divers who are babysat by guides in less than 60'/20M of tropical water can't be compared to technical divers in 330'/100M penetrating a WWII wreck in the North Sea.

Potential danger is all about risk management. I am safer at 100M than on a skateboard in San Francisco.

I agree with you & Lorenzoid. It's difficult to get a handle on this because of so many factors. I'm pretty "safe" with my usual 30' benign shore dives at sites I know well. I put rock climbing as more risky, but I'm sure if I did that and followed all the rules it's pretty safe too. Then there is health. If you get a heart attack, especially diving solo, you're done, whereas you'll probably survive that on the basketball court.

But I think the OP is mostly interested in where we as divers rank it with other activities. Our perception vs. what the general public thinks, which of course seems to be scuba is VERY dangerous. Not sure what the data really proves other than the difference of the two.

 

[rjgiddings]

Years ago - I heard from my PADI instructor: " Percentage of accidents while bowling is .04%. With scuba it's .03 % and the reason bowling is more dangerous than scuba is because bowling has alcohol involved."

But in seriousness - perception of the risk - can maybe itself be defined by all kinds of crazy stuff while underwater: decompression illness, drowning, hazardous marine life, air embolism, ,oxygen toxicity...but the whole perspective / foundational level of scuba diving is based on risk management.

If I truly thought it was dangerous, well, I'd go play backgammon or something.

 

[uncfnp]

Good lick with your project. As a former Hookie maybe we are in the same wavelength. I had no problem interpreting your questions.

 

[Kensei]

Has this survey been reviewed by a professor or graduate student? Have you tested the survey on a test group (could friends in your dorm, coworkers, family, etc.) before sending it out? I've done survey research for a living and taken classes in survey design, research design, statistical analysis, etc. Probably your biggest mistake is that the section for rating danger with a 10 pt. scale has not anchors. Is 1 not at all dangerous or very dangerous? I presumed the anchors were in the same direction as the previous section; did I guess correctly? You're leaving it up to the respondent to make that decision, which obviously is not good.

Also, as others have stated, I think it would help to sharpen the language regarding what people are responding to. It appears what you want is a respondent's perception as to the likelihood of death or serious injury from participating in each sport. If that's what you're going after, then state that emphatically vs. mixing words like risk and danger as if they mean exactly the same thing. Overall, I think it only needs about 20 minutes of revision to make it much better.

Good luck!