Solarbird (solarbird) wrote,
Solarbird
solarbird

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Recalibration, findings

The problem with self-selecting surveys are that they come pre-loaded with a substantial bias that you may and may not be able to analyse, in part or in entirety. In the case of the survey I posted on the 25th, there are at least two biases which seemed obvious to me even at poll creation:
  1. People who participate are more likely, rather than less, to engage me than average, biasing towards approachability
  2. People who participate are more likely, rather than less, to find me emotionally approachable, since those with no emotional engagement at all are unlikely to spend time on surveys like this
There were a total of 21 responses (polling software says 22, but that includes my null response set so I could see the results directly), or 7.3% of average unique post views. (286 unique IPs, discounting bots, as reported by viewing statistics).

Even given these biases, a third of those responding find me intimidating enough that they are less likely to engage with me than they would be otherwise; of those specifically finding me intimidating, that number was a clear majority at 54%. The most common reason for intimidation cited by those who feel intimidated is intelligence, by half the respondents (50%) across the two questions.

This analysis probably isn't helping. XD

Also common were a collection of words around intensity, drive, and busyness; also mentioned were creativity, variations on "high partial continual attention," and an assortment of single-occurance answers.

Perceived egotism did not include a significant finding beyond a lack of widespread perception of substantial egotism (mean 3.0, median 3.5, mode 5.0). I do worry a bit about the clarity of the scale, but that's purely hypothetical at this point.

Emotional opacity provided a clear response: of 21 respondents (presumably biased towards engagement, by self-selection in poll), 10 found me emotionally confusing or outright opaque. Discounting two who stated they didn't attempt at all, that would lead to 10 of 19, or 53%. That's disappointing, since I've worked so very hard on this, but good to know. This does not carry over as strongly to my music, however, where only 3 of 18 (discounting three respondents who specifically stated not listening), or 17%, found my music emotionally opaque or confusing.

The last question diverged sharply from all recent experience, wherein of 20 respondents, only 1 (5%) said they might ignore the email, and they noted they might also respond, depending upon their state at the time. Over the last several years, this non-response/ignoring-the-issue response has been the standard response when I've raised an issue over social treatment; I've come to expect it as mostly the norm. Of course, as was pointed out in comments, "...the people who [would] say 'ignore the mail entirely' will not respond to this." That is a confirmed finding. XD

So, of those who responded, a substantial minority find me intimidating, and around half find me emotional confusing or opaque. I hypothesise that those who did not respond (eta: on average) find me more so, not less, due to the nature of the questions and the self-selecting response set. The survey is now closed; thanks to everyone who responded!
Tags: sorting hat
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 23 comments