To help us determine the success of your training thus far, what would you say was the main purpo...
To evaluate a news article about a disaster that happened.
to see my views toward equality in the world?
do determine how people cheat the system in disasters
The main purpose of this study was evaluate disaster response workers reports.
How people look at fairness within the world
To determine how you would judge whether or not a claimant to a natural disaster (Hurricane Katrina in this case) should get money to help them recover to the point they're self-sufficient.
Discrimination based upon religion, gender ect.. The initial part of the survey asked to read Katrina report however, it took a turn and went into something else.
How our beliefs and attitudes influence our decisions.
To understand how people feel about those requesting help.
Given a specific situation, gauge on a general basis to what extent an individual needs assistance provided by disaster relief. Me, no being qualified will give my general opinion based on what trained professionals have determined. The results from my anwers will be used to further develop more efficient training techniques.
To look at views on fairness and decision making
To see what information people feel is important in the analysis of determining help for a given disaster recovery effort
To see if people have compassion for those less fortunate
How to delegate disaster response, kind of like a triage.
To see what people value when trying to decide if someone is a cheat or not.
Test the effectiveness of training material.
To see how people judge others (based on certain things) in a disaster.
I don't know, to see what effect my social/political views have on results.
To determine which pieces of information people find relevant in judging the truthfulness of a claimant in a disaster.
Looking for bias in evaluating victimization?
Looking at how various beliefs influence our responses to the disaster training.
To study each persons reactions to specific types of questions
It seems like you are trying to figure out my values.
how we see other people and if what they have done in their lives affects how they should be helped
To see how we feel about the government and what our views are.
To evaluate how we stand morally and to offer opinions on whether or not people are cheating the system when it comes to disaster relief
I am not sure of the intent of today's study, quite frankly
Making judgments on whether a person should pull themselves up by the bootstraps if they find they are in need
Determine the effectiveness of disaster recovery methods developed recently
opinions about disaster response and how to determine victim eligibility to receive aid.
So far, I'd say that researchers want to know what types of information people would gather if they had to be in charge of disaster relief, and how those choices correlate with their views on morality, fairness and politics.
The main purpose of this study was to evaluate people's opinions and beliefs.
To assess what factors go into seeing what type of help people should be given.
To see what reports we think are most valuable when dealing with evaluations
To ascertain what items of information research participants would access, and then see how it corresponds to other beliefs they might have.
Opinions on natural disasters and how people come together to help
I think the main purpose of this study was to see what type of information we think is relevant to determining whether someone needs help or not.
to study disaster qualifications and see if there is a better/quicker way of doing things?
to give me a responsibility to judge and see how I think.
To test the effectiveness of training materials and to determine whether people of different backgrounds assimilate that information differently.
to determine relief aid to those that slip through the cracks in the system and to determine that aid
The main purpose of this study is to determine whether a new set of training materials that is quicker than the traditional materials will be as effective/more effective at evaluating victims for victim assistance.
To determine fair assistance on how a disaster victim should be compensated
evaluating who should receive special treatment during a natural disaster
To study the effectiveness of training materials for disaster response.
How a person's own views of morality might affect how they view and judge the misfortune of others
To see what topics I would check to evaluate a claim on disaster relief dependent on the mission statement and goal.
To help with the training for people who give out supplies and money to people after disaster. For an example the person giving out supplies to people after Hurricane Katrina.
To see how people's thoughts react to things that may generally be perceived as bad (or vices)
This study is being conducted to improve the training for disaster specialists and lower costs for the training as well.
The extent to which people personalize judgements of others.
How much I care about character as opposed to fairness when determining someone's trustworthiness.
To determine if a new disaster training will be effective and to see how people will learn from it
I am unsure of what the researchers are studying.
I HAVE NO IDEA!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! STOP MESSING WITH MY BRAINNNNNN!
Perception of Katrina and the amount of money sacrificed
Assessing training programs and personality
Perceptions of fairness and qualifications for financial help
Just to see if I could determine what background information would be most useful in judging the genuineness of a request for aid, I suppose
My thoughts and opinions of various topics
how well the professionals use their judgement to those who are requesting assistance
Help to create training that is quicker and efficient then the current training available.
Disaster relief decisions? Whether or not some people deserve assistance over others?
to study people's perceptions on disaster recovery and social status.
to find out what information people find important
Disaster relief evaluation and moral judgments
To figure out which methods are most important when it comes to giving relief when bad storms hit.
government should provide aide to people who is suffering
What people think of moral in our decision and action
To gain insight into opinions on what considerations should be taken into account when assessing an individual for disaster assistance.
to help people more efficiently during a disaster
The purpose of this study is to evaluate persons ideas and perceptions
evaluate new methods of training for disaster relief management
Find my standing morally and socially and use that background to see how I would make decisions
To test a new training procedure for disaster response specialists.
I have no idea. I though it was to evaluate a new method of training.
Either to help with the training to help victims of natural disasters, or our personal views on various things in the world. You covered part of both.
Learning to help others who are involved in emergencies and telling the difference between people trying to cheat the system/
To see how effective new training protocol is.
Evaluating disaster training program for people who helps with disaster relief.
to evaluate if I will follow instructions?
develop shorter and less expensive training strategies that will save money and speed up the process of disaster relief while maintaining the same quality as traditional disaster response training
To determine who is eligible to receive hurricane assistance money
I think this study is attempting to find out what people believe is necessary information to be fair.
What factors people consider when determining whether someone is right or wrong.
How we evaluate the priorities for providing aid to people in society.
To see if I would make the same decisions someone with training would make in a disaster relief scenario.
to judge how important disaster recovery plans are and our decision making
determining the true nature of someone's personality
To figure out if the disaster training manuals will be effective in teaching specialists how to quickly help victims.
To evaluate how new training methods in disaster relief response help save resources and accurately help people get what they need
to gauge what i feel is important in dispensing aid after a disaster and compare to my politics
I think it was to see what information people consider relevant to assessing whether or not someone deserves help - whether they base it on factors of sympathy, fairness, or logic.
The study is to test an experimental training procedure designed for disaster response specialists.
To see how I would make decision on who to help.
To test training procedures designed for disaster response.
wow, to determine how people evaluate social support
To improve training materials for disaster response and relief teams.
To help with how people deal with those that are involved in natural disasters
It was about to test an experimental training procedure designed for disaster response specialists.
Evaluate the factors people consider when making judgments
To identify the factors underlying empathy.
I'm not sure what the purpose of the study was.
To determine what kind of evidence people trust when it comes to assessing people who request government assistance.
To understand what types of information is necessary for making decisions.
It was about peoples reactions on certain situations and their believes.
Supposedly to help you develop the training material.
Help with disaster preparedness situations and prioritizing what information is important.
If political views are correlated to how you treat others when they are in times of need.
To help develop a quicker and less costly plan to train disaster workers on evaluating and finding those who need help and what type of help they neeed
tudy to test an experimental training procedure designed for disaster response specialists.
How do we determine if something is fair or not
Whether people are to blame for their own problems in life
The purpose was to improve training materials for disaster response team members.
either to actually determine if someone is eligible for help or it's another "just how racist are you " type study.
finding out the opinions of what people think is right and or wrong.
to see how people feel about disaster relief programs
seeing what people thing is right and or wrong
what information we need to evaluate another person and how honest they are
To determine the basis of what help is given to whom based on their standing in life.
I think it was to understand perceptions of what requirements are needed to determine disaster relief assistance and how personal characteristics affect those requirements
How i believe my ethical values relate to someone getting help in an emergency situation.
To see how feelings of justice and morality can affect decisions.
To see the values of a person and compassion during a disaster? Or not.
To look at how you would respond in certain situations and how you determine what is right and wrong in making this responses.
To see how we feel about certain moral beliefs as it pertains to disaster relief.
It was purported to be the assessment of training materials, however I suspect that it was to rate one's feelings of empathy toward others.
About basic thoughts of oneself and others and make a judgement of a lawsuit
To get an idea of what our values are and relate them to how we treat disaster victims
To understand how people feel about victims of tragedy
It was about the evaluation of the product
I think the purpose of this study was to examine what information people need to be able to judge a situation based on that person's values.
The study is looking at how people make decisions especially in regard to fairness.
to see what people would want to know in a scenario to determine fairness?
Determine how moral education and beliefs influence thoughts about fairness
to evaluate training materials in disaster relief efforts
analyzing social issues and feelings towards people and government
To determine how the training materials are used to evaluate a disaster victim.
To evaluate if the main idea of the training got through to see if one would choose the correct paperwork to go through to evaluate a case.
how one determines if another is in need of help from society
Judging who is worthy to receive help after a disaster.
seems like the purpose is to assess how people feel about victims of disaster.
Looking at what someone values vs how they would evaluate another person
Whether moral judgments have, or should enter into the decision-making process when responding to crises.
evaluating or studying what biases exist when decisions are to be made in an emergency
To figure out the traits and beliefs of a person who is willing or unwilling to help others during a crisis situation.
to evaluate how people decide who is and isn't "deserving" of suffering
to test new training procedures designed for disaster response specialties
To see how I feel about people and todays society
To see how we judge people and their stories, and whether money or race depends on the help that they receive.
To assess disaster relief evaluation of new training process (but maybe it is a deception study)
decision making. What Should be considered and what Should NOT be considered.
I'm not sure. Determine trust in reporting?
To see how a person might be biased against someone and therefore not be apt to help? Judge them. I honestly do not know.
to determine how we can make the process of disaster relief more efficient.
To line up my opinions with expert opinions concerning disaster program reliefs.
Evaluate new way to review disaster applications
Effect of bias on training effectiveness?
how personal values help form opinions on social matters
To evaluate new training material for disaster control specialists.
At first I thought it was about what my views were on the money given out throughout the country for tragic situations. Now I feel like it was just something to see how much I really pay attention to what I was supposed to read.
To determine if someones past should affect how society lends aid
To compare how participants in this study would evaluate the qualification of a given individual for disaster relief benefits versus how a professional did so post-Katrina.

Sometimes researchers cannot reveal everything about a study, because doing so may alter how peop...
To get my opinion about different topics.
to test our hidden views and opinions towards equality?
probably but i haven't noticed if you kept it hidden then how would i see it.
I'm somewhat familiar with statistical research methodology having taken a basic class in it in college. If there is deception involved I would be ok with that as its a normal part of some types of research. I'm not sure though what the other point in thestudy would be in this case, though I suspect I'm not being told everything. Maybe the questions about your political affiliation and the questions about how you view different controversial issues (the agree/disagree section) would have something to do wth helping you see how I'd judge if the claimant gets money.
I did not . I believed it was about Katrina
I doubt the story about training relief workers is true. I think you want to see how prejudice influences social decisions.
answers based on a false study statement?
That people might have bias in their decision making processes
To find what information we feel is important
study demographic behavior against a topic
Would be to determine how people view those of a different class - i.e. Hurricane Katrina brings up imagines of lower class African Americans struggling, so what reasons do we feel cause them to "cheat" the system
Does information about natural disasters enhance compassion?
To see how people judge others in a disaster.
no clue, I don't even try to figure that crap out.
That people given different mission statements will choose different sorts of reports to determine whether a disaster claimant needs help.
Looking at how political or religious beliefs affect how a person perceives a victim.
I only began to think this with the last couple of questions, but it seems to be less about disaster training, and more about how various beliefs influence our judgements of people seeking disaster relief.
You want to know how easily swayed I am.
I did not hold any beliefs toward that direction at all
What criteria would you consider in order to believe someone was telling the truth about something
to see how people determine what is fair
Well it seemed pretty clear to me .Nothing seemed hidden
Well, I was a little concerned that there wasn't any training about the types of information that disaster specialists look for when deciding when to help.
the survey is about how people act for politics
I think that the study has to do with a more abstract concept, such as determining one's level of trust and how that fits into their other beliefs.
I do not think we were going to go through the training like it was suggested in the beginning of the survey. I think they study was based on the choices made in the information selection.
Maybe to see what we think we would need to evaluate a application for assistatce?
I won't be evaluating persons in a disaster.
I think I was provided with a disaster to get me thinking about helping someone but then was given questions concerning discrimination. Would this scenario have an effect on my choices?
whether those with high "moral standards" are likely to judge the needs of a disaster victim harshly rather than be objective.
im sure there is but not sue what that would be
To see whether I am biased to seeing the world as unfair/fair after selecting what would be the criteria to evaluate the victim.
Someone's tendency to determined assistance needed when past abuse of a system occured
Perhaps to find out what information is considered relevant to someone being considered at risk of committing welfare fraud.
I think the real point is to study how a person's own morality might affect how they view the misfortunes of others
Feelings towards how people get what they deserve?
How people respond to questions after reading them.
I do not believe there was another reason.
The disaster response training wasn't real.
How I make decisions about people, not disaster training
Assessing suitability for employment in disaster relief situations
I do not know, I didn't think about that
It must have something to do with whether or not I like New Orleans... YOU LIED TO ME, YOU DAMN DIRTY APE!!! I LOVE CAJUN FOOOOOOOOOD!
Beyond determining peoples views and how they would behave because of them, I don't know.
Not sure possibly what I previously stated
I guess it would be to see how someone's self-described liberal/conservative orientation affected how much information they wanted to see?
nothing. feels like you were trying to figure out the best way to provide relief while weeding out the cheaters
I think the assessment about weather and storm is not really what the researchers want to find out..
That maybe this information wont be used to help train disaster aid workers
answers of this study are completely anonymous
To see how how personal beliefs about morals and other human traits effect how they would judge those effected by disasters.
Maybe to see how a person's background and social standing affects decision making
Trying to find any connection between a person's demographics/political view point and how many of the different categories for reports were selected.
Definitely not about effectiveness of training materials.
To see what information about a person will make someone act with bias towards them.
Determining the background of the people looking for assistance.
I think that the disaster response part was a smokescreen, but the rest was the same.
Our attitudes towards society determining how we perceive giving aid
I am sure that there was but I have no clue what it would be
probably trying to manipulate people into requesting certain kinds of information for decisions that you assume without cause are inherently legitimate and beneficial rather than destructive
To see how framing the idea of a devastating natural disaster affected one's views on morality and their political views
compare my politics to my choices of important in for for dispensing aid
I think people were being tested on how they perceive fairness in helping people in general.
About our thinking and attitudes toward the politics and life in general.
I suspect the actual purpose is to study people's attitudes towards victims
Determining how to responsibly distribute money in disaster relief with the Hurricane Katrina example
There usually is and this one is probably to see what materials I would want to see and if there was some sort of bias there.
To determine my willingness to help those less fortunate.
I suppose it could be to determine whether people care more about how someone was affected by a disaster or whether they're taking advantage of the system
I think the researchers were more interested in the type of information participants WANTED to see as opposed to their actual decisions about whether to grant assistance.
I don't know, but survey deception is the rule, not the exception.
Also commented on morals and virtues which were not expected.
As previously stated, I believe one of the goals was to see if there is a correlation between political views and humanitarianism.
unsure it seemed fairly straight forward
i know there is a point, right, or else what would be the point ? ha ha . but i couldn't say what you eggheads are testing. have a great day though !
to see how different people judge people
What type of reports would we ask for? Ones that show possible negative info?
What types of materials would be most useful to access the candidates background information.
i think it's to judge how racist, sexist or religious you are
I don't think we are evaluating learning materials as stated at the beginning but that you are looking at how we judge others based on their honesty etc.
To gauge the morality and sense of justice of people.
To see how you respond to questions about what is important information to know in a situation.
To find out our beliefs of what is right and wrong. To see how we feel about what is important characteristics for a person to have.
I believe it was to measure a person's ability to understand and empathize with others who are less fortunate and in need of help.
To understand peoples beliefs of others morally
I don't know if there was another point other than the one given at the beginning of the study.
Yes of course i just follow the instructions and give my best responses as well for the study
I don't think there was point beyond what I was told
Determining how people make ethical decisions
Not sure, but I think you're drawing conclusions on the types of information the subject requests
What types of things one would use to evaluate the worthiness of a candidate for aid.
I think it could be empathy. To see if one can relate to others.
how individuals determine if someone in society is in need of government aid
how we react in certain situations and our personality types
to see how people value other human life
I noticed that some of the reports had information like criminal history, history of making other claims, etc. It seems that it may be looking at whether people would rely on past "immoral" behavior to judge a claim rather than the current facts at hand.
Perhaps to see if moral judgments are entering into the decision-making process when responding to crises or emergencies. As you gave Hurricane Katrina as an example, perhaps one can say that the emergency response would be quite different if the victimswere more economically advantaged. That also applies to race.
To figure out what type of people are more willing to help out in a crisis situation.
DO THE VALUES ONE HOLDS MATTER WHEN GIVING OUT EMERGENCY AID
To see how we judge poor people and minorities when they need help.
To see how individuals of differing political ideologies differ in what they consider important for qualifying for disaster relief.
I don't think there was any deception involved.
I dont know, I feel like maybe it has something to do with bias against certain groups possibly.
something involving the concept of fairness; whether we get the credit we deserve, whether we think life is generally fair.
There is nothing I can think of. I think everything was well explained..
I would have to say based on the questions asked, you were looking at a person bias to assisting their fellow man in time of crisis. You would use filters such as "pulling one up by their boot straps" "not depending upon the government" versus "reachingout to those in need", or "taking care of the less fortunate" etc. Conservative vrs liberal.
measuring political and social attitudes
What the actual hypothesis of the study is and how the two tasks were related
To evaluate views of what we think is moral and not.
Just was testing to see if I would really read the article probably.
That society views good and bad as determinants for what you deserve out of life.
Seems like you're trying to make evaluations about study participants' religiosity, moral code, and political affiliation.
I think it had to do with interpreting how empathetic people are towards someone in a natural disaster.