Team:HKUST-Hong Kong/survey.html
From 2011.igem.org
Line 127: | Line 127: | ||
- | + | ||
<ul><li>Effectiveness and Feasibility for Further Spreading</li></ui> | <ul><li>Effectiveness and Feasibility for Further Spreading</li></ui> | ||
<ul><li>The Form of the Survey</li></ul> | <ul><li>The Form of the Survey</li></ul> | ||
- | To get more effective and valid results, a more widely distributed online survey should be launched and more hard copies should be distributed randomly to the general public. Originally, the form thought to be adapted for this survey is the online version for the easiness to collect mass responses and unlimited access to the Internet. But the results here show that the online form has a strong inherent bias in the respondents, especially in fields like education and age when the distribution range is relatively small. So a solution for this is to still use the online version as a data input agent, but the link should be spread more widely on the Internet, accompanying with bigger range of field surveys.</p> | + | <p align=justify> |
+ | To get more effective and valid results, a more widely distributed online survey should be launched and more hard copies should be distributed randomly to the general public. Originally, the form thought to be adapted for this survey is the online version for the easiness to collect mass responses and unlimited access to the Internet. But the results here show that the online form has a strong inherent bias in the respondents, especially in fields like education and age when the distribution range is relatively small. So a solution for this is to still use the online version as a data input agent, but the link should be spread more widely on the Internet, accompanying with bigger range of field surveys.</p><br><br> | ||
- | |||
<ul><li>The Effectiveness of the Parameters in Part Two</li></ul> | <ul><li>The Effectiveness of the Parameters in Part Two</li></ul> | ||
- | |||
- | |||
<p align=justify> | <p align=justify> | ||
+ | The variances in the personal background in this set of data do not show significant difference. The inherent problems of the online survey may contribute a lot, but the effectiveness of the parameters is also in doubt. However, this should be further checked with the results from the more widely spread survey</p><br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
<ul><li> | <ul><li> | ||
Major Hypotheses from the Snapshot Results</li></ul> | Major Hypotheses from the Snapshot Results</li></ul> | ||
+ | <p align=justify> | ||
Although the influence of the parameters about the personal information cannot be counted a lot in the analysis due to the relatively big bias, the interaction between the targets of the questions can still give some meaningful hypotheses regarding the factors influencing the general public’s perception about the synthetic biology. To sum up, there are three major findings or possible hypotheses from this snapshot.<br><br> | Although the influence of the parameters about the personal information cannot be counted a lot in the analysis due to the relatively big bias, the interaction between the targets of the questions can still give some meaningful hypotheses regarding the factors influencing the general public’s perception about the synthetic biology. To sum up, there are three major findings or possible hypotheses from this snapshot.<br><br> | ||
Revision as of 05:20, 5 October 2011
|
Introduction
Regardless the heated discussion atmosphere around the synthetic biology, few systematic surveys in this field has been conducted, especially in Asia. In this case, the iGEM2011 HKUST Team with the help of their Austrian partners, Markus Schmidt and Lei Pei, of IDC The result shows that this online survey system can be adaptable, but should be spread more widely on the Internet and supported with more distributed hard copies to make the data more valid and reliable. And two major hypotheses have been obtained from this snapshot analysis. The first is that the public in HK tend to have a positive but close to natural perception of the synthetic biology, showing relatively conservative attitudes. Second, the general publics are very likely to know little about the synthetic biology, which probably has a positive correlation with their overall impression about this new technology. However, notwithstanding this lack of knowledge, the general awareness of the possible risks is nearly at the same level, and the opinions on the future development of this technology are similar. Finding Three is that the public are more inclined to accept the synthetic biology product when it has a big price advantage over the ordinary product. Back Discussion
To get more effective and valid results, a more widely distributed online survey should be launched and more hard copies should be distributed randomly to the general public. Originally, the form thought to be adapted for this survey is the online version for the easiness to collect mass responses and unlimited access to the Internet. But the results here show that the online form has a strong inherent bias in the respondents, especially in fields like education and age when the distribution range is relatively small. So a solution for this is to still use the online version as a data input agent, but the link should be spread more widely on the Internet, accompanying with bigger range of field surveys. The variances in the personal background in this set of data do not show significant difference. The inherent problems of the online survey may contribute a lot, but the effectiveness of the parameters is also in doubt. However, this should be further checked with the results from the more widely spread survey
Although the influence of the parameters about the personal information cannot be counted a lot in the analysis due to the relatively big bias, the interaction between the targets of the questions can still give some meaningful hypotheses regarding the factors influencing the general public’s perception about the synthetic biology. To sum up, there are three major findings or possible hypotheses from this snapshot. Back Acknowledgement
For successfully completing this snapshot survey report, the heartfelt thanks should give to the people below for their continuous support and guidance to this synthetic biology survey:
Mr Markus Schmidt and Mr Lei Pei, from IDC The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) Professor King L. Chow, from the Department of Life Science in HKUST Professor Michelle Yik, from the Department of Social Science in HKUST Mr ZENG Jin, Teaching Assistant from the Department of Social Science in HKUST The Hong Kong Institute of Engineers The Hong Kong teachers’ association Members and Advisors of the iGEM2011 HKUST Team Back For a complete survery report, please click [link]here[/link] to download the PDF file. |