Survey Description Clause Samples
Survey Description. I designed the survey to find evidence of differences in beliefs and future expectations for ISA participants and non-participants. Each ISA applicant received a survey invitation email which explained that only Purdue University students were being invited and that I was conducting the survey to learn about how their “experiences, attitudes, expectations, and beliefs influence how [they] pay for college.” I did not explain that I was specifically studying the ISA program as I did not want students to be thinking about the ISA program when answering the questions. All students who completed the survey were immediately given a $20 Amazon gift card code. Approximately 60 percent of ISA applicants chose to complete the survey. To account for potential non-response bias, I use propensity score 10A large fraction of students go directly to graduate school, some take internships, and others report that they are still seeking full-time employment. weighting to weight the data by the inverse probability of responding. Very few observables affect the likelihood of responding to the survey and the weighting method does not change the results. After answering a few standard demographic questions, the students were asked to rate a set of 12 statements about debt aversion. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (2011) show that framing a financial contract as a debt or as a loan affects the student’s reported willingness to enter into the contract. My hypothesis is that students with greater aversion to debt will be more likely to choose to participate in the ISA than students with less debt aversion. The debt aversion questions used in this survey were developed and tested for reliability by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇ (1995). Students were asked to report that they either strongly agree, somewhat agree, neither agree or disagree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with each statement. Of the 12 statements, 6 are “pro” statements and 6 are “anti” statements. Values of 5 through 1 are assigned to the responses for ease of reporting with the scale reversed for “anti” statements. Therefore, for all statements, higher values indicate greater aversion to debt. The questions are reported in Table 4 along with the mean score (on a 5 point scale) for each question for participants and non-participants. The final column reports the p-value for a t-test of the equality of means. As shown in Table 4, there is no evidence that ISA participants have greater debt aversion than ISA non-participants...
Survey Description. The survey was conducted in two rounds. The aim of the first round was to identify all the different goals of stakeholders regarding the DIT4TraM project pilots and the Key Performance Indicators needed to be measured. Subsequently, on the second round of the survey, the local stakeholders around the cities of DIT4TraM pilots were asked to prioritize the different objectives and assess the relative Key Performance Indicators according to their organizations' objectives. The survey was addressed to representatives from public and private operators, service providers, transport network companies, ▇▇▇▇ platforms, other enterprises in the wider industry, as well as authorities from countries of European Union with a greater focus on the stakeholders operating in DIT4TraM pilot cities. In the first round of the survey, all stakeholders were asked to indicate the areas of impact that they believed were relevant to the pilot(s) of their interest and then to indicate the goals of their organization regarding these areas of impact as well as to propose the Key Performance Indicators that they believed were the most appropriate to measure. As areas of impact, we considered network performance, network efficiency, traffic safety, energy/environment, socio- economic and cost. In the second round of the survey, the stakeholders were asked to prioritize the previously defined criteria and indicators according to how important they were to their organizations using Analytic Hierarchy Process and 0-100 scoring technique. The questionnaires of both rounds of the survey can be found in Appendix A and Appendix B respectively.
Survey Description. The survey was implemented in the form of an online set of questions created using LimeSurvey (▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇/), an open-source tool for web surveys, and hosted on INCITES’ servers. An introductory page provides information on the project and the AHP methodology as portrayed indicatively in the following figures. Figure 3: End-user survey AHP methodology Figure 4 depicts an example of the AHP question implementation in the survey. Due to technical limitations of the survey tool used, the [1,9] range described in the methodology has been adapted into a [0,8] range while left hand side selection utilises the [-8,0] range. These adaptations come without loss in methodological effectiveness as the numerical representation of the responders’ assessments remains unaffected.
1.1.1. The full content of the End-user Questionnaire is available in Appendix A.: End-user questionnaire.