Would you take a Geocaching Survey

[+Trekks]

Hello Geocacher,

 

This request for participation in a survey is part of a research project that will contribute to my doctoral dissertation. I would appreciate your help with this project.

 

I am seeking to understand geocachers’ opinions about the possible impact that caching may have on the natural environment. You can help by completing the brief survey linked below. It will take approximately 25 minutes to complete the survey. By responding to these questions, you will help create a better understanding about how geocachers view their impact.

 

If you are a charter member, I am also seeking to understand, if you are still an active geocacher, what keeps you geocaching. If you are no longer active, why did you choose to no longer participate?

 

If you have found and logged an APE Cache, I am interested in knowing why you might have traveled to find that geocache and how far your travel was from your home.

 

To participate in this research project, you must be of the age of consent in your location. If you are, click on this link to participate in the survey.

 

http://oregonstate.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_3Ca5mg7fJtbrmdf

Thank you, and happy caching!

 

Dianna Fisher (FESPhD17)

Doctoral Student, College of Forestry

FESPhD17@gmail.com

541-230-4029

 

Study PI: Joanne Tynon, Ph.D.

Study Title: Perceptions of Geocaching: Impacts and Involvement

 

(Note: This survey is posted with permission of Geocaching HQ.)

[+Trekks]

Thank you for getting this posted and thanks in advance to those who take the time to answer my questions. Please feel free to follow up with me via email or posting here.

[+narcissa]

Just some pointers that I hope will make your instrument and the data you get from it more useful in the long run:

 

-There ought to be a "Don't know / Prefer not to say" option for these questions. This keeps people from quitting the survey out of frustration. This is particularly important on demographic questions. People do not like to report income!

 

-The responses don't always make sense in the context of the question. For example, "I have bushwhacked to find a geocache rather than follow the established trail." The answers "Always, etc." don't make sense here. It's really a yes or no question. It could be addressed with terms that are more reasonable for the context, like times per year, or how many times overall. It also totally overlooks the fact that some geocaches are not on established trails, making it difficult to answer.

 

-The "describes me" scale is skewed toward the positive with only one possible negative answer. It should be a balanced scale with a neutral.

 

-"When I geocache, I find the geocache and leave." This is difficult to understand without context.

 

-"I plan vacations and other travel around geocaching." The scale doesn't make sense without some more context. About half the time I spend travelling? Half the time I am alive? Be more precise.

 

-Geocaching with a smartphone or GPSr: this should be captured as one question so you don't get conflicting responses.

 

-"A great deal" isn't substantially different than "a lot." Use a more precise scale.

 

-You can be disabled have a disability and still be employed at the same time. Be careful about sensitive topics! (Edited to take my own advice!)

Edited November 28, 2016 by narcissa

[+Manville Possum]

Glad to see your survey posted here on the official geocaching site.

[+Team Microdot]

-You can be disabled have a disability and still be employed at the same time. Be careful about sensitive topics! (Edited to take my own advice!)

 

I once got into a slightly protracted discussion on this subject with a person directly affected and it was made very clear to me that she had an impairment, not a disability.

[+niraD]

-The responses don't always make sense in the context of the question. For example, "I have bushwhacked to find a geocache rather than follow the established trail." The answers "Always, etc." don't make sense here. It's really a yes or no question. It could be addressed with terms that are more reasonable for the context, like times per year, or how many times overall. It also totally overlooks the fact that some geocaches are not on established trails, making it difficult to answer.

There were a number of questions like this that were hard to answer. Taking this particular question as an example:

• What about situations where there is no established trail?
  
• What about situations where there is no officially established trail?
  
• What about situations where one is not aware of an established trail until after one "bushwhacks" to the geocache location?
  
• What about situations where one is aware of an established trail, but chooses to "bushwhack" in a responsible manner, avoiding the trail for sound reasons but minimizing the impact of off-trail travel?
  
• What about situations where one is aware of an established trail, but chooses to "bushwhack" with no regard for the impact of off-trail travel?
  
• And so on...

And is any off-trail travel considered bushwhacking? Or do actual bushes (or other plants) have to be whacked?

 

-"I plan vacations and other travel around geocaching." The scale doesn't make sense without some more context. About half the time I spend travelling? Half the time I am alive? Be more precise.

There is also a difference between planning vacations/travel for the purpose of geocaching, and planning to incorporate geocaching into vacations/travel that will happen anyway, and not planning geocaching-related travel in any way.

 

-Geocaching with a smartphone or GPSr: this should be captured as one question so you don't get conflicting responses.

There is quite the spectrum of device use, including those who use smartphones exclusively, those who use dedicated GPS receivers exclusively, those who use different devices at different times for various reasons, and even those of us who don't use any electronic devices while navigating to geocache sites. This survey mainly distinguishes between exclusive smartphone users and everyone else.

[+niraD]

-You can be disabled have a disability and still be employed at the same time. Be careful about sensitive topics! (Edited to take my own advice!)

I once got into a slightly protracted discussion on this subject with a person directly affected and it was made very clear to me that she had an impairment, not a disability.

I know people who consider their disabilities to be a part of their identities, and some identify themselves as such with pride. And I know people who consider it offensive to be directly identified by their disabilities/impairments/whatever.

 

This might be another situation when "none of the above" or some sort of "fill in the blank" could be useful.

[+The A-Team]

It sounds like the survey may need to be tweaked, so I'll wait a bit before going through it.

 

Just so you know, the folks here in the forums are a select (and pretty "unique") subset of geocachers as a whole, and not necessarily a representative sample. Many of the forum regulars are more experienced and knowledgeable in many areas than other cachers, and are generally from English-speaking countries. To get the best sample, you'll need to try to get the survey to cachers in lots of other ways so you can get a good variety of cacher-types to respond.

[+Team Microdot]

Just so you know, the folks here in the forums are a select (and pretty "unique") subset of geocachers as a whole

 

That seems like a select and pretty "unique" claim - I wonder what it could mean?

[+fbingha]

I took the survey and can see the gist of what you are after and I think you can generate patterns from the questions as they are presented... This thread will probably turn into a debate about the patterns that you are seeking.

 

... Do cachers care about the rules for hiding

... Do cachers care about disturbing the environment

... Do cachers care about their numbers

... Do cachers cache for themselves or to impress others

... Do cachers get great enjoyment from geocaching .. well this one is going to skew highly yes since you are sampling from from the geocaching forum.

[+barefootjeff]

I found it mostly good but a few questions had me scratching my head.

 

The one about removing archived caches doesn't allow for the many instances where a cache is archived because it's gone missing and so can't be removed.

 

The questions about caching taking you away from your family and grandchildren weren't easy to answer as I'm single and don't have a family, let alone grandchildren.

 

Some could perhaps have been a bit clearer. Does what I spend on geocaching in a year include fuel and vehicle wear and tear? "I find the geocache and leave" depends entirely on the cache - if it's a park-and-grab on the side of a road, well, yes, but if it's somewhere nice, say at the end of a long hike, then I'll probably hang around and do a bit of exploring. And I've bushwhacked rather than use a trail because I didn't know the trail was there until I reached GZ.

 

It also struck me as a bit odd that you didn't ask what country I'm from. I'd have thought that regional differences would have been of interest, also relevant to the APE cache questions as they're really irrelevant to someone on the other side of the world. The extent of land use policies also varies enormously between countries, from very strict in some places to almost non-existent in many others.

 

Otherwise it was all pretty good and I hope your research goes well.

[+narcissa]

I know people who consider their disabilities to be a part of their identities, and some identify themselves as such with pride. And I know people who consider it offensive to be directly identified by their disabilities/impairments/whatever.

 

This might be another situation when "none of the above" or some sort of "fill in the blank" could be useful.

 

Yes, it's a very tricky subject and a term that is acceptable to some is off-putting to others. It's a topic where I would definitely consult a subject matter expert about the wording.

 

In a survey where disability isn't relevant at all, it's probably best to offer a more generic "Not currently working outside the home" category, as well as a "None of the above." Really, the person writing the instrument should be certain that this question is needed and that it isn't just being tossed on at the end out of habit, which is a common rookie mistake. Is it important to differentiate between geocachers who are employed and those who aren't? Probably not. In a survey that doesn't even ask gender or geography I find it unlikely that employment is a useful variable.

 

Fill in the blank isn't useful until it's coded, and likely unnecessary in a basic demographic question.

[+narcissa]

-The responses don't always make sense in the context of the question. For example, "I have bushwhacked to find a geocache rather than follow the established trail." The answers "Always, etc." don't make sense here. It's really a yes or no question. It could be addressed with terms that are more reasonable for the context, like times per year, or how many times overall. It also totally overlooks the fact that some geocaches are not on established trails, making it difficult to answer.

There were a number of questions like this that were hard to answer. Taking this particular question as an example:

• What about situations where there is no established trail?
  
• What about situations where there is no officially established trail?
  
• What about situations where one is not aware of an established trail until after one "bushwhacks" to the geocache location?
  
• What about situations where one is aware of an established trail, but chooses to "bushwhack" in a responsible manner, avoiding the trail for sound reasons but minimizing the impact of off-trail travel?
  
• What about situations where one is aware of an established trail, but chooses to "bushwhack" with no regard for the impact of off-trail travel?
  
• And so on...

And is any off-trail travel considered bushwhacking? Or do actual bushes (or other plants) have to be whacked?

 

-"I plan vacations and other travel around geocaching." The scale doesn't make sense without some more context. About half the time I spend travelling? Half the time I am alive? Be more precise.

There is also a difference between planning vacations/travel for the purpose of geocaching, and planning to incorporate geocaching into vacations/travel that will happen anyway, and not planning geocaching-related travel in any way.

 

-Geocaching with a smartphone or GPSr: this should be captured as one question so you don't get conflicting responses.

There is quite the spectrum of device use, including those who use smartphones exclusively, those who use dedicated GPS receivers exclusively, those who use different devices at different times for various reasons, and even those of us who don't use any electronic devices while navigating to geocache sites. This survey mainly distinguishes between exclusive smartphone users and everyone else.

 

Good additional points.

 

I would have designed the device question with several options, and made it a "check all that apply." The follow-up questions are problematic because there is no skip logic, so someone can specify that they cache with both, but only one device is captured by the follow-up.

 

I don't want this poor person to feel like this is a pile-on, but I'm a pollster by trade so I can see in my head what this data is going to look like, and as it stands, it won't be particularly useful.

[+cerberus1]

All-in-all an okay survey.

Kinda surprised that my issues were similar to barefootjeff (on the other side of this orb), when what country you're from wasn't asked.

 

Similar to others I guess, on the "either/or and that's it" GPS usage.

 

Some questions seemed odd (to me) in how they could be answered.

To me, "Does not describe me" doesn't mean I'm not involved in the outdoors and environmental issues, simply that I was involved in those issues long before this hobby.

[+Trekks]

-You can be disabled have a disability and still be employed at the same time. Be careful about sensitive topics! (Edited to take my own advice!)

 

I once got into a slightly protracted discussion on this subject with a person directly affected and it was made very clear to me that she had an impairment, not a disability.

 

I am officially disabled and the term doesn't bother me. I think it's point of view - if I think impairment, I would think I had too much to drink.

[+niraD]

To me, "Does not describe me" doesn't mean I'm not involved in the outdoors and environmental issues, simply that I was involved in those issues long before this hobby.

"Has geocaching caused you to stop beating your wife?"

 

Okay, I don't think any of the questions were nearly that bad, but there were a few questions where I had to choose whether to answer the question literally, as asked, or to answer the apparent intent of the question.

[+Manville Possum]

-You can be disabled have a disability and still be employed at the same time. Be careful about sensitive topics! (Edited to take my own advice!)

 

I once got into a slightly protracted discussion on this subject with a person directly affected and it was made very clear to me that she had an impairment, not a disability.

 

I am officially disabled and the term doesn't bother me. I think it's point of view - if I think impairment, I would think I had too much to drink.

 

I also am disabled and I agree with you.

[+Team Microdot]

-You can be disabled have a disability and still be employed at the same time. Be careful about sensitive topics! (Edited to take my own advice!)

 

I once got into a slightly protracted discussion on this subject with a person directly affected and it was made very clear to me that she had an impairment, not a disability.

 

I am officially disabled and the term doesn't bother me. I think it's point of view - if I think impairment, I would think I had too much to drink.

 

I did think the person in question was being somewhat nit-picky, especially as the discussion revolved around what the geocaching community at large could do to enhance enjoyment of geocaching in general for people with disabilities. If anything, debating which word to use undermined the real objective of the discussion.

[+Trekks]

Thanks so much for all the feedback. Unfortunately, I can't make changes on the survey at this time. It's been through 5 committee members who each had input on what they wanted to see in it. It does use a validated scale even though some of the questions/answer choices might be worded oddly. I found that many people interpret them in many ways and just the drafts that were passed around with my faculty advisors were interpreted in different ways with each.

 

This does give me some good pointers for any follow-ups I need to do.

 

Thanks again!

[+Trekks]

 

Good additional points.

 

I would have designed the device question with several options, and made it a "check all that apply." The follow-up questions are problematic because there is no skip logic, so someone can specify that they cache with both, but only one device is captured by the follow-up.

 

I don't want this poor person to feel like this is a pile-on, but I'm a pollster by trade so I can see in my head what this data is going to look like, and as it stands, it won't be particularly useful.

 

Actually, there's quite a bit of skip logic in there You just don't see some of the questions depending on your answers.

 

I think being a pollster by trade is interesting. This is meant to inform my research for my dissertation so the data will be quite useful.

[+Wet Pancake Touring Club]

The one about removing archived caches doesn't allow for the many instances where a cache is archived because it's gone missing and so can't be removed.

 

I had real trouble with this question as I have never hidden a cache. There was no option to that effect. So, any answer that I would supply would be incorrect. So, I answered in the negative, when there really needed to be a N/A option.

 

As another university employee, I can sympathize with all the review processes that you needed to go through to get this approved. My only suggestion would have been to add yet another review to the mix, by setting up a focus group of local geocachers, and going over the proposed survey with them. But even that might have had to go past the IRB for approval.

[+narcissa]

The one about removing archived caches doesn't allow for the many instances where a cache is archived because it's gone missing and so can't be removed.

 

I had real trouble with this question as I have never hidden a cache. There was no option to that effect. So, any answer that I would supply would be incorrect. So, I answered in the negative, when there really needed to be a N/A option.

 

As another university employee, I can sympathize with all the review processes that you needed to go through to get this approved. My only suggestion would have been to add yet another review to the mix, by setting up a focus group of local geocachers, and going over the proposed survey with them. But even that might have had to go past the IRB for approval.

 

Another good idea. It's a shame the survey forces people to give false answers or drop out. It really biases the sample.

[+Trekks]

 

Another good idea. It's a shame the survey forces people to give false answers or drop out. It really biases the sample.

 

You can leave any question blank. There are no forced answers in this survey.

[+narcissa]

 

Another good idea. It's a shame the survey forces people to give false answers or drop out. It really biases the sample.

 

You can leave any question blank. There are no forced answers in this survey.

 

It might be a good idea to indicate that somewhere. I can tell you from experience that many people will just drop out from frustration if they don't know they can skip.

[+Trekks]

 

Another good idea. It's a shame the survey forces people to give false answers or drop out. It really biases the sample.

 

You can leave any question blank. There are no forced answers in this survey.

 

It might be a good idea to indicate that somewhere. I can tell you from experience that many people will just drop out from frustration if they don't know they can skip.

 

It's in the instructions. Right above where you click "next" to signify that you read the instructions.

 

"Your participation in this research project is completely voluntary and you may stop participating at any point. You will not be penalized in any way for not completing the survey. You are welcome to skip any questions."

[+narcissa]

 

Another good idea. It's a shame the survey forces people to give false answers or drop out. It really biases the sample.

 

You can leave any question blank. There are no forced answers in this survey.

 

It might be a good idea to indicate that somewhere. I can tell you from experience that many people will just drop out from frustration if they don't know they can skip.

 

It's in the instructions. Right above where you click "next" to signify that you read the instructions.

 

"Your participation in this research project is completely voluntary and you may stop participating at any point. You will not be penalized in any way for not completing the survey. You are welcome to skip any questions."

 

Yeah, but you can see in the comments from others that the ability to skip wasn't apparent to respondents. It needs to be built into the programming within the survey. When the survey isn't easy to do and/or doesn't have sufficient answer categories, it leads people to quit and biases your sample. The categories should be exhaustive and have the "don't know / prefer not to answer" built right in. Making the survey easy and clear for respondents at every step should be the very first design consideration.

 

It's also important to have those options built in for the integrity of the data, because you won't know if blanks are people who skipped, or if there is a programming error in the survey.

 

Especially since your sampling plan seems to be just voluntary response, having the questions set up this way means your sample will be biased toward a subset of people who are predisposed to answer the survey a certain way. You can see examples of people giving false responses because the categories aren't sufficient to capture their experiences. When the survey is as long as this one it is especially important to keep people from dropping out.

 

If your dissertation is going to be based on the data you're collecting here it is really worth making sure the methodology is sound so the data is reliable and functional. It looks like you've attempted to set this up so you can do some multivariate analysis with the perceptions questions. If all of your respondents are similar you won't be able to conduct that kind of analysis because there won't be any differentiation.

[+The A-Team]

In addition, due to the ambiguity already mentioned on a number of the questions, you will likely get some bad data. That is, even if two respondents have the same opinion, they may answer the question differently. Hopefully everything works out, but it sounds like you'll have to do a lot of massaging and analysis of data to get something useful for your dissertation.

[+fizzymagic]

Unfortunately, this survey does not represent PhD-level work, at least not in any scientific discipline I am familiar with. The excuse that changing it to be a more effective research tool would be "too hard" is not viable -- doing research properly is hard. I am hoping that the CO learns a lot from this discussion and redesigns the survey to be a valid research tool.

[+Trekks]

Unfortunately, this survey does not represent PhD-level work, at least not in any scientific discipline I am familiar with. The excuse that changing it to be a more effective research tool would be "too hard" is not viable -- doing research properly is hard. I am hoping that the CO learns a lot from this discussion and redesigns the survey to be a valid research tool.

 

Hi All, this survey is meant to inform the DIRECTION of my research - this is not the research itself.

[+narcissa]

Unfortunately, this survey does not represent PhD-level work, at least not in any scientific discipline I am familiar with. The excuse that changing it to be a more effective research tool would be "too hard" is not viable -- doing research properly is hard. I am hoping that the CO learns a lot from this discussion and redesigns the survey to be a valid research tool.

 

Yeah, at this stage of the game it really shouldn't be a big deal to consider this a test run, realize it's not quite ready for prime-time, and correct it moving forward.

[+geodarts]

Hi All, this survey is meant to inform the DIRECTION of my research - this is not the research itself.

 

I realize that a survey can be a starting point. I was frustrated by it to some degree - my experience did not fit neatly into many of the questions, perhaps because my interests in the game have changed over the years and I fall into a lot of cracks. In any event I often thought "it depends." It would have helped if there had been space for brief explanations.

 

Still, I hope that the survey gives the information you need to focus your research.

[+K13]

I took your survey very soon after it was mentioned here. I found some of the same issues as others with the allowed answers not fitting my experience. My chosen responses may not have fit exactly with my intention due to this. It was fortuitous that the survey allowed for skipped questions, as I will never respond to a general survey like this which asks my income/age.

 

I wish you well with your research, and hope you take some of the GREAT suggestions of others in this thread in preparing your next survey.

[+hzoi]

I took the survey. I won't presume to offer suggestions on it, as the highest I got was an LL.M.

[cezanne]

Unfortunately, this survey does not represent PhD-level work, at least not in any scientific discipline I am familiar with. The excuse that changing it to be a more effective research tool would be "too hard" is not viable -- doing research properly is hard. I am hoping that the CO learns a lot from this discussion and redesigns the survey to be a valid research tool.

 

Hi All, this survey is meant to inform the DIRECTION of my research - this is not the research itself.

 

Regardless of how you refer to your survey, I fully agree with fizzymagic. I quitted your survey very soon after having started it. Leaving most questions unanswered does not make sense to me at all and creates a considerable bias too.