Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
Done.
BTW - the market research pro in me can't help but offer some survey advice. Your choices should be MECA
Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive
Several of your choices were problematic. For instance the one on number of dive trips had choices of 5-10 and 10-15. So, if I went on 10 trips, which answer do I select? Opposite problem on the question involving depth, where choices were 100 to less than 150, more than 150 to 200... So, if I dove to 150, there is no answer for me to select - only <150 or >150.
The combination of the trip question and air travel questions will likely yield odd/unintended/unusable results. I answer "Less than 5 trips" for trip # and "All of them" for air travel. So now you know 100% of my trips involved air - but have no idea how many trips I took or how many times I traveled by air. (I think the trip question has too great a jump at the low end, going right to "Less than 5" - I would recommend 0, 1, 2-3, 4-5, 6 or more. I suspect that there's a huge difference between taking 1 trip a year and 3-4 trips a year, but the way you ask the question will not allow you to detect that difference. Similarly the max depth question ranges from 150-200. Huge difference there from a diving perspective: if 50 people answer that question and 25 dove to 155ft and 25 dove to 199ft... that level of detail is disguised by only knowing that 50 people dove to 150-200ft. With a number response such as the # of trips or depth of dives you would be better off letting the person enter an absolute number. Also, with ranges you now cannot calculate mean/median/mode statistics. If people entered an absolute number you could calculate such descriptive statistics.
More than you wanted to know about research studies... but can't help myself.