Discussion 8

This week for posts 2 &3,  I want you to converse with your classmates about which existing and additional factors are important to consider for this study.

Make sure to read through all the documents in this week’s lesson pertaining to Methods.

POST #1

In 2012, professor and researcher Paul Piff was riding his bike when he was nearly taken out by a car. This inspired Piff to create a simple research question:  Does driving a certain type of car make you more/less likely to blaze through a crosswalk?    

Cutting off a pedestrian violates California Vehicle Codes. It’s illegal, so Piff and his team wanted to find out if it was still happening, and to what degree.

Read the attached document with the methods section for this field study.

To get the most accurate, honest results, the researchers considered many factors, such as the sex/gender of the person crossing the street.

1. Among the factors the researchers discussed, which factor do you think is most important? Why?
2. Make a list of four additional factors you think the researchers should have considered while conducting this study. For each factor, briefly explain why you believe it was important.

Ex – I believe the researchers should have considered the percentage of high class cars in San Francisco. If there is a high percentage, then there would naturally be more expensive cars coming through the crosswalk, which might skew the data.

3. Describe one ethical factor the researchers either considered or should consider. For example, it might seem like a good idea to see which drivers have a criminal record. However, this would prevent the study from recording anonymous data, and could be an ethical violation for digging into people’s private records.

POST #2 & 3

Respond to at least two classmates and add something to each conversation.

Post #2 classmate

1. Among the factors the researchers discussed, I believe the most important factor is determining whether the driver indicated having seen the pedestrian by directing his or her gaze. I think this because it eliminates the possibility that the driver was distracted, such as looking at his or her phone, and therefore, focuses more on whether the driver actually intended to stop or ignore the pedestrian.
2. I believe the researchers should have conducted this research in multiple areas with different demographics. Only using one area as a representation of such a broad research question will not lead to the most accurate results. Secondly, the researchers should have considered the different seasons and weather. Although this means that the research must be conducted over a longer period of time, seeing how the behavior of drivers change depending on the weather can be insightful. Thirdly, the researchers should only have accounted for cars with the same number of people in each car, preferably, cars with just the driver. Having other passengers could easily distract the driver from making his or her decision. Lastly, the researchers should have considered the amount of damage a car had, and therefore, only account for those without any exterior damages. I believe this would make the research more interesting by narrowing down the possibility that the driver may just be inexperienced or careless, and thus, focus more on the car type.
3. One ethical factor the researchers considered was gender differences. Instead of just using one gender for the confederate, both genders were included in order to better understand the different reactions of drivers. Being able to account for how gender differences affect the outcome of certain circumstances is crucial in order to obtain the best research results.

Post #3 classmate

1. Among the factors the researchers discussed, I think the most important factor was only coding vehicles that had no other vehicle in front of it when passing the designated point on the road. I think taking this factor into consideration was the most important because the presence of another vehicle would most likely impact the driving of the car behind them, regardless of car type. Researchers only coding vehicles with no other vehicle in front of it accounted for the influence of a car and its driving on another. If the first car slowed down for the pedestrian, all the cars behind it would stop as well and demonstrate bias in the researchers’ findings.

2. An additional factor the researchers should have considered while conducting this study was determining the usual presence of pedestrians at the crosswalk during the set time on an average day. If that crosswalk is typically busy during the weekdays between those times, frequent drivers of that street will know to look out and slow down for pedestrians, regardless of car type. Another factor the researchers should have taken into consideration was the weather or visibility level for those days. If one day was foggy or raining and the others were sunny, drivers may have been driving with more caution on the foggy/rainy day as opposed to the clear weather days, where they were able to see better. A third factor the researchers should have taken into consideration is the age of the confederate in addition to their gender. Drivers maybe more attuned and willing to yield for children and teenagers as opposed to elderly individuals, which could have affected the findings of the research. Researchers should have also considered the speed at which the vehicle was approaching. Cars going at a faster rate may have drivers not paying as much attention to their surroundings or impede their ability to see the pedestrian in a timely manner as opposed to slower driving cars. Also, speeding cars may indicate the driver’s tendency to disregard traffic laws at a higher rate than others, regardless of car status.

3. An ethical factor the researchers considered was keeping the coder blind to the hypotheses of the study. Although it would seem helpful to have the coder know the hypotheses of the study, that knowledge could have led the coder’s personal bias skew the data recorded. For example, if the coder knew the outcome researchers were hoping to find, they may have intentionally or unintentionally recorded data in favor of that hypothesis, which may prove to be an ethical issue in the fair collection of the data for this study.