Safe Speed Forums

It was a bit odd, as a woman just turned up on my doorstep and asked if she could come in to ask me some questions about road safety..

I was slightly unsure but I wanted to get my view across, so she came in and sat down. The questions were something like this:

1. In a road accident, the driver is always at least partly to blame. Do you agree, disagree, or neither? My answer: disagree.


2. [Shows me the latest propaganda advert on her computer, with the dead girl at the roadside and 'it's 30 for a reason']. What reaction did the advert produce in you, from this list?
[List contained:]
It made me think about how I drive.
It made me realise the importance of speed.
It carried a vital message.
It irritated me.
[and possibly some others I cant remember.]

My answer: "I thought it was misleading and manipulative, therefore irritated me, but don't just put that it irritated me without saying why as that would misrepresent my view. " Don't know whether she recorded the full reply, or just the stock answer of "it irritated me".


3. Do you ever break the speed limit:
My answer: yes.

3b. If yes, why? [List of accepted answers:]
When I'm late for a meeting.
I like driving fast.
To keep up with other traffic.
Speed limits are silly/unrealistic.
[and possibly some others I cant remember.]

My answer: I think some speed limits are set wrongly, but speed limits in principle are not silly. She wrote 'speed limits are silly' anyway.

4. How many drinks is it acceptable to drink before driving? 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

I refused to answer as there is not enough information, eg what kind of drink, what weight person, how long before driving.

5. Recently, I have been more aware of speed limits. Do you agree, disagree, or neither?

My answer: agree, but do not consider it a good thing.


-


There might have been others but I can't remember. It wasn't quite as blatantly biased as I expected, but I do think they are attempting to manipulate it to show that either you agree with speed cameras, or you are a killer. No alternatives.

Some dodgy questions IMO

Which driver, or is there only ever one driver in a crash? Or are they trying to imply pedestrian accidents so that the hard of thinking just say 'driver'? At best a crap question.

Depends if she recorded you full answer. Would you put money on it?

Oh well, at least it's neutral.

If she failed to properly record your answer she's skewing the survey.

Nail on head. Another meaningless question.

Agreeing could be used to justify the policy, failing to agree could be used to justify extending the policy. Not saying it would be though.

I'd still go with pretty slanted, just not overtly biased. Like you say, they're fishing for answers that can be interpreted as support, so they word the questions just so and limit the responses and bob's your uncle. New headline: overwhelming support for whatever, survey claims.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Did you find out who she was employed by and who she was polling for?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

It's not hard to design the questions and available answers so that they're likely to produce the results you want. It's even easier to design the questions and answers so that they're very unlikely to produce the results you don't want.

Disgraceful bias.

Some groups even use their own volunteers to go out & do opinion polls, with no standards required, friends will do.
These do not even need the questions or set answers to be slanted to their suit the opinion they want.
I know because one group asked me to help do one.

It was TNS Field Ltd, a member of the Market Reserach Society, according to the lealet she gave me:

TNS Field Ltd
TNS House
Westgate
London
W5 1UA

Tel: 020-8967-4250

She also asked me some tedious stuff about what electrical stores I have heard of, what trade unions I have heard of, and what TV adverts I have seen for oranges.

Absolutely, have you seen that episode of Yes Prime Minister where Humphrey 'surveys' Bernard and gets him to say he wants National Service back. Then he asks him again, in a different way, and gets him to say he would oppose National Service.

That's why I said this wasn't as biased as I expected. They didn't explicitly say: "Do you prefer to drive at the speed limit, or kill babies." But it was still bad.