Dear all,
I have permission from admin to make this post.
I am conducting some research on fans' views of racism in the AFL and I would really appreciate a few minutes of your time to complete an anonymous survey I have compiled: https://doit.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8qzEMac13Dw4X7E
I hope you agree it is a topical study and I thank you in advance for your time.
What are the possible disadvantages, or risks, of taking part?
"It is not anticipated that there are any risks to participation in this study beyond those encountered during everyday life. There should be no adverse events that you will suffer from participating in the project, but if you do then please contact the chief investigator"
What the hell does that mean ?
Checking this out!
Checking this out!
CAUTION
Before clicking the link I'd like to see some verification from the CSC admin staff that this is legitimate.
CAUTION
Before clicking the link I'd like to see some verification from the CSC admin staff that this is legitimate.
That's what I've asked for Lods - recommend NOT clinking the link until this has been resolved.
Can I suggest it be closed down for now? I'm furious with this OP question as it is for a multitude of reasons
CAUTION
Before clicking the link I'd like to see some verification from the CSC admin staff that this is legitimate.
I gave it my permission as moderator. I also referred it to our great and glorious leader who gave his OK.
Seems like some overreaction to this. All those people mentioned as researchers and co researchers have legit profiles at the University South Australia and other places. Unless they are that rare breed of academics who are up to no good, or unless someone has stolen their profiles (to what end I can't imagine), I'd say the chances of anything suss is pretty low.
What are the possible disadvantages, or risks, of taking part?
"It is not anticipated that there are any risks to participation in this study beyond those encountered during everyday life. There should be no adverse events that you will suffer from participating in the project, but if you do then please contact the chief investigator"
What the hell does that mean ?
It is a standard “informed consent” statement that appears (in similar form) in research involving volunteer participation. In other words, the researcher’s institution covering its butt.
Seems like some overreaction to this. All those people mentioned as researchers and co researchers have legit profiles at the University South Australia and other places. Unless they are that rare breed of academics who are up to no good, or unless someone has stolen their profiles (to what end I can't imagine), I'd say the chances of anything suss is pretty low.
Yes, but “theacademic” could have avoided angst by providing some background, such as institution, research design, use of results, etc in the original post.
Yes, but “theacademic” could have avoided angst by providing some background, such as institution, research design, use of results, etc in the original post.
Probably just a kid but I have to concur, you introduce yourself with at least where you are from. I realise the researcher might not want to disclose their own identity in case it biases the result.
I only posted the 'Caution' because the OP stated he had admin OK
We just needed that confirmed and once that was done I'm comfortable .
Been posted on a few other sporting forums too under the same name, the waffle as DJ suggested is just the usual disclaimer and legally not worth anything but all academic research surveys have it.
I would want official confirmation its been sanctioned by the University/Educational insitution as a research project, some of them are private research but under the uni banner for credibility.
Its should give a link where you can check...
Where's the communication guys. Mods were told nothing about this. How are we expected to perform our roles without being informed?? Sorry, but not impressed.
PS I'm referring to whoever gave the ok for this.
Seems like some overreaction to this. All those people mentioned as researchers and co researchers have legit profiles at the University South Australia and other places. Unless they are that rare breed of academics who are up to no good, or unless someone has stolen their profiles (to what end I can't imagine), I'd say the chances of anything suss is pretty low.
Worked part time on a ad hoc basis as a tutor at a Uni for a couple years and Academics are up to no good plenty of the time.
One Academic I knew got a grant to study the breeding of crayfish, he bought himself a boat, scuba gear and a holiday up Nth and had a few crayfish in a tank purely for looks. Of course the crayfish all died and the research paper was fit for dunny paper only. Not suggesting same will happen here with this survey but academics are very capable of manipulating the system to help themselves ..
Worked part time on a ad hoc basis as a tutor at a Uni for a couple years and Academics are up to no good plenty of the time.
One Academic I knew got a grant to study the breeding of crayfish, he bought himself a boat, scuba gear and a holiday up Nth and had a few crayfish in a tank purely for looks. Of course the crayfish all died and the research paper was fit for dunny paper only. Not suggesting same will happen here with this survey but academics are very capable of manipulating the system to help themselves ..
And on top of all that, it sounds like he would have had a very nice seafood barbecue as well lol.
If that's the content quality of the "statement" they present ("should" and"suffer"??) in search of a questionnaire response, then god help the future standard of universities, pitifully poor as they are. Common courtesy completely absent. But my expectations realised.
Should not have been entertained in the first place.
Yes, but “theacademic” could have avoided angst by providing some background, such as institution, research design, use of results, etc in the original post.
Whoever gave him/her permission to post this on here should have made the first introductory post in the thread explaining what it is all about.
Whoever gave him/her permission to post this on here should have made the first introductory post in the thread explaining what it is all about.
And it’s in the wrong forum 🙄
Apologies for any confusion on my part as the detail of the project is explained in the information sheet at the start of the survey. I wrote to the mods who gave me permission so I approached this forum in an ethical way. The research has also been passed by the ethics committee of the host university as stated in the information sheet. I didn't mean to offend anyone, more just ask those interested to share their thoughts on this topic anonymously. Thanks to those who have shared their thoughts.
Apologies for any confusion on my part as the detail of the project is explained in the information sheet at the start of the survey. I wrote to the mods who gave me permission so I approached this forum in an ethical way. The research has also been passed by the ethics committee of the host university as stated in the information sheet. I didn't mean to offend anyone, more just ask those interested to share their thoughts on this topic anonymously. Thanks to those who have shared their thoughts.
All good matey. Best of luck on this very worthy research project.
And it’s in the wrong forum 🙄
Fixed
Just a bit of a communication problem. We rarely get such requests and sometimes they prove to be a bit dodgy. There's also always a bit of caution with first time posters.
Thanks Lods and PaulP. Again, apologies for any error on my part. For anyone interested in sharing their thoughts, here is the link to the survey: https://doit.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8qzEMac13Dw4X7E
Where's the communication guys. Mods were told nothing about this. How are we expected to perform our roles without being informed?? Sorry, but not impressed.
PS I'm referring to whoever gave the ok for this.
I gave my OK: I was approached. I then suggested to the academic that he should approach Lord Lucifer, as our Big Banana. To be honest, I don't know who else was approached.
I had no idea that the other moderators were not be approached - I am sorry for not informing you, my colleagues.
I must admit that I am surprised by the reaction. I hadn't expected such a strong response.
I gave my OK: I was approached. I then suggested to the academic that he should approach Lord Lucifer, as our Big Banana. To be honest, I don't know who else was approached.
I had no idea that the other moderators were not be approached - I am sorry for not informing you, my colleagues.
I must admit that I am surprised by the reaction. I hadn't expected such a strong response.
Probably shouldn't worry too much about it.
I think it's understandable how it could have happened and as crash said he didn't know who else was informed.
I feel a little responsible.
If the opening post hadn't mentioned 'admin approval' and just posted I wouldn't have given it a second thought....although as usual with a post out of the blue like that, it sometimes pays to be cautious.
Getting an admin/mod to validate that it was agreed to was all that was required.
We were probably undone by the fact 'theacademic' went about things in a proper manner....which is a bit out of the norm.
We had some banana on here the other week trying to flog NFL facemasks.
Survey done. Easy peasy.
Done.
Only witnessed one racist incident in the last 10 years where some Collingwood supporters yelled out "Go home you filthy wogs".
I was also at a couple of games where Hawthorn fans booed Adam Goodes but that wasn't racism.
Also done
Some aspects regarding club policy for members, I'll embarrassingly admit, I wasn't sure about.
They may not exist or not be easy to find on the club website (I've just had a quick look) but I may need look a bit more thoroughly to educate myself.
Thanks guys for completing the survey. I really appreciate it.
Done the survey as well. Hope my answers were useful, but I may have brought in more questions than I answered. I couldn't even answer the one about my own ethnicity straight.
[1] All of my overseas born ancestors arrived in Australia between 1802 and 1882. So I have at least 4 native born generations of Australian in me. In the previous generation their were English, Scottish, Germans and Maltese and they links to damn near everywhere.
[2] I have ancestors from most European countries. The only countries I haven't found ancestors from yet are Albania, Bulgaria and Romania. And most of these people were the ruling class: kings, queens, princesses, princes, dukes, duchesses, earls, etc. But am I of their nationality when those ancestors are 1000 years old? or more? The oldest was a Welsh Chieftain who was born in 40 BC. Do I call myself a Frank, as I have Charlemagne as an ancestor along more than 40 lines? A Saxon, as I have Alfred the Great as an ancestor? A Roman, as I have Alexius Comnenus and Romanos IV as ancestors? A Viking? Ivar the Boneless was one of my ancestors, as was Thorfinn Skullsplitter and Olav the Holy. French? There are probably only a thousand or so people with a better claim to the Kingdom of France than I have. Or how about Asian? I have almost all of the Kings and Queens of Jerusalem as my ancestors. The Judges of Corsica. The Kings of Aragon, Castille, Navarre and Portugal. Prince Vladimir of Kiev. There is one line in my family tree that claims to have Parsifal and the Knights of the Grail as ancestors: like I believe that one! German Emperors. Lombard kings and nobles. Polish Piast rulers, the Arpad dynasty from Hungary. Where do I draw the line?
I just say that my ancestry is pan-European.
Also done.
Then again, maybe I should say I was born in a test tube and a replicator. It would avoid complex questions. :) :) :)
Interesting ancestral story crashlander. Thanks for completing and supporting the project.
Thanks also to PaulP and anyone else who has completed it.
Done
Done
Racist comments were common back in the day but I haven't heard anything for many years. Of course, sitting with Carlton supporters lessens the potential for poor behaviour ;)
Interesting ancestral story crashlander. Thanks for completing and supporting the project.
Thanks also to PaulP and anyone else who has completed it.
No worries. I'd be keen to hear the results once your work is done. Assuming of course, it's ok to make these results public.
Done
Racist comments were common back in the day but I haven't heard anything for many years. Of course, sitting with Carlton supporters lessens the potential for poor behaviour ;)
Same
Playing and watching country football back in the day the racist remarks were around.
I dont attend live matches much these days but I have difficulty recalling hearing any such comments at AFL level in recent times.
Same here. I’ve been sitting in the AFL Members area of the MCG, usually on the top deck, and the top deck of Docklands. I’d imagine if you wanted to have a go at a non-white player or umpire, you’d want to be close to the ground on the terraces. If you want to call out racist sledges from the top deck loud enough to be heard on the ground, you’re going to attract unwanted attention. That’s the only concern I have about the survey. I also answered that I couldn’t recall any racist comments but I doubt whether that’s evidence the AFL hasn’t got a problem in that regard.
Back in the day I used to frequent the standing areas at games and some of the commentary there was really off I have say. Since all seating was introduced I can honestly say that things have improved out of sight. I can't remember the last time I heard anything of a racist nature.
Thanks for your input everyone. I appreciate it.
@theacademic Might be time to pose my concerns that will become all too clear by the time you finish reading.
1. How is this funded and for what purpose?
2. What credentials, age and background do
you or the university bring to the table that warrant or encourage the completion of this questionnaire?
3. Over what period of time is this information collated?
4. Is this done by state, by sport, by age group of the replies?
5. What mechanisms do you have in place to discern what you believe to be honest responses from those that are not that might be parochial / biased or used in outright deceit to distort the numbers? Committee?
6. When
and how will the results be published
and to whom?
Thank you
@theacademic
Might be time to pose my concerns that will become all to clear by the time you finish reading.
1. How is this funded and for what purpose?
2. What credentials, age and background do you or the university bring to the table that warrant or encourage the completion of this questionnaire?
3. Over what period of time is this information collated?
4. Is this done by state, by sport, by age group of the replies?
5. What mechanisms do you have in place to discern what you believe to be honest responses from those that are not that might be parochial / biased or outright deceit to distort the numbers? Committee?
6. When and how will the results be published and to whom?
Thank you
Same page here, CC.
I would have thought research into racism in the family home, where it starts, would be far more revealing. Racism in the AFL is only symptomatic of our society and culture at large.
In addition you might want to research racism in all religions, and also in a variety of cultures & socioeconomic groups.
Then you might want to research what in our psychology predisposes certain types (and who they are) to prejudice, hate and fear. Now that's a project worth pursuing... there's already some very helpful information in this regard available.
@capcom Most of this information is located in the information sheet at the start of the survey, but here goes:
1. The research carries no funding. It is purely an academic study.
2. The choice is yours whether you want to complete it or not. If you check the status of the researchers involved in the information sheet, you will see they are well qualified to pursue this study.
3. We are looking to collate the data in a period of two months.
4. This is an AFL study, it is not measured state by state.
5. Every piece of research contains the threat of bias. In this case, whilst we can't control what people say we hope that by making the survey anonymous that people are as honest as they can be.
6. The research will be published in academic journals as stated in the information sheet.
Thank you.
@capcom
Most of this information is located in the information sheet at the start of the survey, but here goes:
1. The research carries no funding. It is purely an academic study.
For what reason is it "purely academic?" Choice or design?
2. The choice is yours whether you want to complete it or not. If you check the status of the researchers involved in the information sheet, you will see they are well qualified to pursue this study.
You didn't think that was necessary to enunciate in the information sheet?
3. We are looking to collate the data in a period of two months.
Why such a short period and how many respondents might you expect?
4. This is an AFL study, it is not measured state by state.
Football is played in every state and territory in the entire country, and the existing AFL competition across the five biggest states. You're not interested in the response splits on state lines? Did the AFL play any part whatsoever in the design or intent of this questionnaire?
5. Every piece of research contains the threat of bias. In this case, whilst we can't control what people say we hope that by making the survey anonymous that people are as honest as they can be.
And if they are clearly not intent to do so with fictitious or unsupported evidence?
6. The research will be published in academic journals as stated in the information sheet.
How are your conclusions summarized and specifically noted given the proclivity of some sections of the media (should they wish) to sensationalize what they choose from the final "report"?
Thank you.
Capcom - maybe you should pass on the survey. It looks like you can’t be convinced to participate, which is voluntary in any case.
Thanks again to those who have shared their thoughts.
@theacademic .... indeed, my survey has concluded with a scrutiny and assessment of university standards.
Last shout to see if anyone has a spare few minutes to help with my research by completing the survey in the original post. Thanks to those who have contributed their thoughts.