Final Questions
In this section we should focus on having our laid out final questions. Just put your idea for a final question and then other people can try and "fix" it if need be. I know our other thread was intended for this but it's just gotten a little messy with everyone discussing in it. Try and keep you question concise and as on the subject as possible. Once this is done, we can choose the 5 we think are best and then simply cut and paste them across.
Guess I'll kick this off...
I met with Prof. Cutler yesterday and although he would like us to stick to five, he is quite in favor of one of those acting as a screening question. So, something along the lines of what Karlson and others were suggesting could be:
On a scale of 1 to 10 (where 1 is low and 10 is very high) how would you rate your level of interest (or should this be knowledge?) in Canada's involvement in the Afghan conflict?
Feel free to suggest modifications etc.
I think Ari's question is a good start for screening purposes. I'm just wondering how we are going to fit it into the rest of the survey. If they answer a "10" or very interested then are they now allowed to answer the rest of the survey, or specific questions? On the other hand if they answer a "1" or lack interest, are they now prevented from answering further questions on the survey? Or is this question just gaining a better perspective on the interest in Afghanistan and foreign policy? Just a few things to consider if we are going to submit Ari's question.
Personally I think that the following question would be an excellent way to conceptualize the general publics opinion on how they view their own military presence. It also explains whether the public views the mission to Afghanistan as mission for the general good or if it had interior motives:
"To what extent do you agree with the following statement: The purpose of Canada's involvement in Afghanistan is focused on peacekeeping operations." Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree
Let me know what you think.
As mentioned in the previous posts I think its important to somehow highlight Canada's alliance with US (+ NATO) as it seems to be one of the major factors in Canada's involvement in the war. Here is a suggestion, let me know what you guys think...
Given the importance of the Canadian alliance with the United States, do you agree with Canada’s decision to participate in the war in Afghanistan? Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree
OR (to be more specific, although might require extra knowledge)
Given Canada’s membership in NATO, do you agree with Canada’s decision to participate in the war in Afghanistan? Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree
Lastly, what do you guys think about proposing a question that targets the medias involvement in the perception of the war in Afghanistan?
I think Nikta's questions would not only give a good analysis of how Canadians feel about the war in Afghanistan but also provide data on how they generally view the country's membership in NATO and its alliance with the US.
I have a couple suggestions that largely concern whether Canada's participation in the war was in the nation's best interests, from a security standpoint.
"Do you agree that the Canadian government's decision to participate in the war in Afghanistan has made Canada and its allies safer from international terrorism?" Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.
OR
"Given that Canada's involvement in Afghanistan is directly linked to the 9/11 attacks, do you agree that Canada's participation in the war in Afghanistan has made the nation and its allies safer from international terrorism?" Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.
Please give me your thoughts.
Patrick, I really like your first question! As for your second one, I kind of feel like using the first part of it would be like pushing a certain idea over others. By telling someone "given the involvement is directly linked to X.." (whatever factor you think is dominant), you are basically saying Canada would NOT be in Afghanistan today has 9/11 never happened. While this might be true, some people might feel that Canada's presence in Afghanistan has little to nothing to do with national security and 9/11, but other ideas that could vary from saving the world to converting all Afghans to Christianity (extreme example, but you get my point). HOWEVER, how about we stick with the second part or it, or your first version. I think its an important question to ask.
So after my corrections above, I suggest the following as a final question, based on Patrick's idea: "To what extent do you think the Canadian government's involvement in the war in Afghanistan has made Canada and its allies safer from international terrorism?" Possible Answers: Strongly disagree / disagree / neutral (did not make a difference)/ agree / strongly agree / Don't know.
Feel free to comment, etc., of course. However, since I feel like its about time we get questions finalized, lets try to keep it clear and concise from now on and get some final questions out there.
Your probably right that my first question is a lot better. The second is simply to specific and a more generalized question would be less likely to complicate an individual's perception about Canada's involvement in Afghanistan. So its probably best to stick with my first question.
I mainly wrote the second question to tie in Canada's membership in NATO, as after the 9/11 attacks NATO invoked the article 5 clause which states that an attack on one is an attack on all. However Nikta's second question is probably better at addressing that issue.
Thanks for the feedback.
Great questions everyone!
So in sum we will have questions that explore these themes (as rehashed from what everyone had proposed):
In relation to Afghanistan... 1.) any screening questions 2.) one question focused on Canada's role as a peacekeeper/peacemaker 3.) Whether Canada should have been involved in Afghanistan 4.) Canada's role/involvement in the issue of international terrorism 5.) Canada's reputation post-Afghanistan
Feel free to change it but I think we should start wrapping up/finalizing our set of questions.
Cheers, Karlson
I think we should use this first one more as a means of gauging the participant's knowledge level than as a screening question per se. Comparing the survey responses on this question with those of the rest could, to some extent, help us gauge the confidence level of our participants.
Since I got no comments no this question on the other thread, and I actually came to like it, I am going to re-post one of my original questions here. Please do let me know what you think, I am sure it could use some editing:
"In your opinion, how has Canada's global reputation been affected by its involvement in the war in Afghanistan?"
possible answers: "positive - showed full commitment to NATO which will benefit Canada in the future", "positive - proved military strength and leadership in world affairs", "it had no effect", "negative - Canada had a part in the murder and torture of innocent civilians", and "negative - the war was too long, cost too much, and hurt Canada's reputation as a peacekeeping nation"
Lee, although I like your question, I think there are a few implications with the answers. In particular, since the "negative" response are connected with "murder of innocent civilians" in addition to mentioning its high costs, people are going to likely provide ideal answers as opposed to how they truly feel. Furthermore, The reasons as to why people might disagree or agree with the question might be different than the choices you have provided. It might be a better idea to leave it as "positive, No effect (neutral) or negative". Let me know what you think! :)
Best wishes,
Nikta
I have to agree with Nikta, we can't risk editorializing the responses. Though we might want to break it down further into "very positively, somewhat positively, neutral, somewhat negatively, very negatively", or something similar.
Nikta, thank you for your feedback! I think you are right and that's why I wanted to hear what other people thought. I guess that on one hand I wanted to find out whether people saw the war as negative or positive in regard to Canada's reputation, and at the same time I was also interested in WHY they thought it was a good/bad thing. But I see how it can be problematic as a survey question - obviously my answers were slightly extreme (though, talking to Canadians about Afghanistan, that's the type of responses I'd normally get, which is why I put them as examples).
ANYWAY, bottom line, I'm going to change the answers to this question, following you suggestion to "positive"/"no effect"/"negative"/"don't know" (which I'll keep including unless someone objects).
Thanks again.
It might be a good idea to try and keep the number of answers the same. So for each question we end up with a scale going from 1 to 5 and potentially a 6 demarcating lack of knowledge.
Lee, in this case your question would have 6 potential answers, basically what Morgan suggested plus your "don't know" option.
Keeping this consistency throughout the survey would allow us to map the data much more easily, which is most likely what we're going to end up doing.
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.
Ok, since we're getting pretty close to the deadline, I thought it might be best to gather all the questions we have thus far in one space...
1.How would you rate your level of knowledge in regards to Canada's involvement in the Afghan conflict? 1.Very high, 2. High, 3. Moderate, 4. Low, 5. Very low
2.To what extent do you agree with the following statement: The purpose of Canada's involvement in Afghanistan is focused on peacekeeping operations? 1.Strongly agree, 2.Agree, 3.Neutral, 4.Disagree, 5.Strongly disagree, 6.Don't know
3.Given the importance of the Canadian alliance with the United States (e.g. membership in NATO), do you agree with Canada’s decision to participate in the war in Afghanistan? 1. Strongly agree, 2. Agree, 3. Neutral, 4. Disagree, 5. Strongly disagree, 6. Don't know
4. To what extent do you agree with the following statement: The Canadian government's involvement in the war in Afghanistan has made Canada and its allies safer from international terrorism? 1. Strongly agree, 2. Agree, 3. Neutral (did not make a difference), 4. Disagree, 5. Strongly disagree, 6. Don’t know
5. In your opinion, how has Canada's global reputation been affected by its involvement in the war in Afghanistan? 1. Very positively, 2. Somewhat positively, 3. Neutral (did not make a difference), 4. Somewhat negatively, 5. Very negatively, 6. Don't know
Final comment's anyone?
Good idea to start gathering the questions!
In general, following the "Dummy variable" lab and my personal opinion, I would probably rather go with the lower numbers standing for more "negative" responses. That being said, I also left in bold questions I personally think should be on, and in italics are some of my comments.
1.How would you rate your level of knowledge in regards to Canada's involvement in the Afghan conflict? 1.Very Low, 2. Low, 3. Moderate, 4. High, 5. Very High
2.To what extent do you agree with the following statement: The purpose of Canada's involvement in Afghanistan is focused on peacekeeping operations? 1.Strongly agree, 2.Agree, 3.Neutral, 4.Disagree, 5.Strongly disagree, 6.Don't know - I think this question could use some clarification, if used. Does ANYONE think the operation was ever focused on peacekeeping? If so, a simple definition of peacekeeping might be helpful here
3.Given the importance of the Canadian alliance with the United States (e.g. membership in NATO), do you agree with Canada’s decision to participate in the war in Afghanistan? 1. Strongly agree, 2. Agree, 3. Neutral, 4. Disagree, 5. Strongly disagree, 6. Don't know - are we basically asking if Canada's involvement in Afghanistan strengthened the relationship? Just not sure what we are trying to get out of this question, but I still think CA-US relations and NATO are important issues to tackle
4. To what extent do you agree with the following statement: The Canadian government's involvement in the war in Afghanistan has made Canada and its allies safer from international terrorism? 1. Strongly disagree, 2. Disgree, 3. Neutral (did not make a difference), 4. Agree, 5. Strongly Agree, 6. Don’t know
5. In your opinion, how has Canada's global reputation been affected by its involvement in the war in Afghanistan? 1. Very negatively, 2. Somewhat negatively, 3. Neutral (did not make a difference), 4. Somewhat positively, 5. Very positively, 6. Don't know
Everyone, please do comment since we should probably get this done soon :) (is the final version due tomorrow?)
Nicely done Lee. Yeah, I totally agree with the scale reversal...seems to make more sense, from a visual as well as psychological stand point.
The deadline is tomorrow...I'm guessing the same as assignment 2, at 7pm?
In regards to
Question 2: Good point, very few would actually believe that the purpose was ever peacekeeping and it might in fact be misguiding to frame it this way...How about a potentially divisive statement like: To what extent do you agree with the following statement: The purpose of Canada's involvement in Afghanistan is to defeat the Taliban?
Question 3: I think the point of this question is to gauge the people's attitudes towards Canada's military and strategic alliances as they relate to the Afghan conflict. So how about: Do you agree that Canada’s decision to participate in the war in Afghanistan strengthened it's military alliance with the United States as well as it's position within NATO?
Lee and Ali,
I really like the way you guys have analyzed the questions! I think we should finalize these and put them up on the main page. I agree with both of your assessment of question 2. As for your reference to question 3, given that the major reason for Canada to participate in the war in Afghanistan was due to its alliance with the US (and its membership in NATO) I personally think it is important to assess how people view Canada's obligation to provide military support to allies. I think it will provide us with an answer that evaluates how people feel towards the alliance and military (defense) obligations in addition to how they would feel towards Canada's involvement in future wars. Let me know what you guys think!
Nikta and Ari, I see what you guys are getting at. Let me know what you think about the following re-phrasing of the question:
Keeping in mind Canada's strong alliance with the United States of America and its membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), to what extent do yo think it was Canada's obligation to take part in the NATO led mission in Afghanistan? 1. Not at all Canada's obligation 2. to some extent 3. to a high extent 4. Don't know.
Also, inspired by the US election study from our assignment, what do you guys think about including a general question like "Overall, was the war in Afghanistan worth the cost for Canada?" Y/N. This can also be looked at as sort of a screening question.
Lee, I like the way you rephrased the first question on Canada's alliance with the US and NATO. Like Nikta I think its important to gauge the average Canadian's opinion of the country's global security and defense commitments.
Your second question that asks whether the war was worth it also provides a simple yet straighforward answer. Obviously some Canadians could be for or against the war for different reasons. Some may feel it hurt Canada's reputation as a peacekeeping nation, others may lament the combat deaths, while some may have seen the war as simply a waste of taxpayer dollars. On the flip side others may see the importance of the humanitarian mission, the fight against terrorism, or the need to stand by longtime allies.
On the whole the questions look good. When should we type them all up.
Lee: The alliance question is looking great, I would just propose a slight modification...
Keeping in mind Canada's strong alliance with the United States of America and its membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), to what extent would you agree with the following statement: it was Canada's obligation to take part in the NATO led mission in Afghanistan? 1. Strongly disagree, 2. Disagree, 3. Neutral, 4. Agree, 5. Strongly agree, 6. Don’t know
Your second question would be a great way to close our section of the survey and, as you point out, would be a great gauge of general feeling. It could very well replace question 2, since we can't figure out how to word it. What do you think of this ever so slight modification? In your opinion, was the war in Afghanistan worth the cost for Canada? 1. Yes, 2. No, 3. Don't know
So I posted on our main page the questions we seem to have general agreement on. Feel free to make adjustments or bring back to discussion whatever question you feel is unnecessary or incomplete. Additionally, we will have to decide on 2 more final questions to include if we all agree to have those three.