Cycling and your wellbeing

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

classic33

Leg End Member
@marley-39-39, how have you managed to use the same questions for body building, running and cycling. Three very different activities, each with their own reasons for taking part in.
 

IaninSheffield

Veteran
Location
Sheffield, UK
Firstly, and I realise this admission may well blow my anonymity, but hey, might as well 'own it'. I *did* complete the survey. Now ...
Terrible survey
Looks like cyclechat members on here have done a survey on your survey & and it's not good
It's a load of guff
Can't agree I'm afraid. Actually it's one of the better surveys posted on here.
It's rare that we're provided with a background to the study, what participation will involve (benefits and drawbacks), any ethical issues we need to be aware of, contact details for the research team, an invitation to provide feedback, and the possibility of a reward for participating. We were also provided with a Participant Information Sheet expanding the information provided at the start of the survey and importantly, given many of the comments here, specifying that it would take around 25min to complete - pretty accurate, as it turned out.

That said, several commenters upthread provided feedback that @marley-39-39 will doubtless find useful; hopefully it's not too late to consider and perhaps accommodate that advice. That many (most?) participants failed to complete the survey may be discouraging, but in itself should also be seen as useful feedback. Perhaps we could sometimes be more sensitive in the way we express that though?

In adding my twopenn'orth, I'd like to offer the following:
  • I didn't feel it was entirely clear whether this was about sport (which I understand as competitive) or about sporting activity for leisure purposes. As others have intimated earlier, the survey questions seemed less appropriate for those who don't compete, even though in the information sheet it states 'You are eligible to take part in this study if you are male or female aged 18+, currently or previously participated in a sport or non-sporting activity/hobbies.' [my emphasis] Perhaps worth reflecting on this and possibly amending participant information? Or maybe include a filter question to separate the competitive sportspeople from those participating for leisure (though of course, some respondents will fall into both camps). For example the section on 'training' has less meaning for someone participating in a leisure activity/hobby.
  • I was slightly surprised how few categories there were for cycling in the section where we were asked to specify a sport. Eight(?) options which might fall loosely under a 'climbing' banner but only two for cycling? The option to specify Kayak Touring, but not Cycle Touring/Bikepacking? (Although of course there was the 'Other' option.)
  • As @Sharky said, when asked to 'state your preferred sport or activity' there was no provision for those who have no particular preference and are equal involved in two or more sports.
  • All questions are compulsory. I appreciate this might be necessary, given that some later questions follow on from and extend previous responses, however, having no option to skip some questions might have contributed to a general sense of disgruntlement.
  • There is no 'Back' option to allow participants to revisit earlier responses. Again, I appreciate this may be intentional.
  • I found some of the questions in the section on relationships difficult to answer because they didn't apply to my circumstances. Can't remember precisely which ones unfortunately and can no longer get back to the questions to refresh my memory. There seemed to be some assumptions about the nature of relationships which don't necessarily hold for everyone. Again, maybe a filtering question might have helped here?

Hope there's something in there that might be useful. Wishing you well with your study.
Doctoral research in a pandemic - sheesh! Good, bad or ugly?
 
Top Bottom