Final Questions

Ari, I don't know if I agree with you on this one. I'll explain: I think deciding to have a certain number of possible answers can really limit us in terms of the kinds of questions we ask. Also, keep in mind other groups are working on other questions for the survey, and from what I've seen some are as simple as "true/false". The way I see it, restricting ourselves to a certain type of questions would just make the survey a bit less interesting, but I'm curious to hear how you think it would help with mapping the data at the end, since it imght be something I have't thought of. I don't mind the changes regarding my question in particular, and in fact that might be a good idea. I just don't think we should insist on 6 potential answers as a general rule.

Good point Lee, I guess we are going to end up combining the survey with all the other teams and that would mean that we will have to make quite a few scale conversions for in order to properly map the answers. However, consistency even just within our foreign policy section, should allow for a much more simplified amalgamation of data and thus more clear results.

But, my insistence aside, it does appear as though we have already moved towards a 5(+1) answer scheme.

However, I fully agree that we shouldn't restrict ourselves to this model. If we really need to change the answer options for one or more of the questions then sure, we should go ahead and do that.