X-Message-Number: 27746
References: <>
From: David Stodolsky <>
Subject: Re: FDGD 2006 Survey Analysis/Commentary (LONG)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:06:53 +0100

On 20 Mar 2006, at 22:37, Kennita Watson wrote:
> Frozen Dead Guy Days 2006
> Cryonics Awareness/Attitudes Survey
>
> Questions About Grandpa Bredo
> 1) Do you think Grandpa Bredo has been properly cryopreserved?   12
> _Yes  30 _No  38 _Don't know

Not Significant (NS) result.

(A non-significant result means that the data can be accounted for by  
random responses, data getting scrambled in transfer to machine  
readable format, etc. However, this doesn't mean that data were  
scrambled, etc.)



>
> 2) What do you think the chances are that science will ever allow us
> to revive Grandpa Bredo?
> 0%     10%     20%     30%     40%     50%     60%     70%     80%
>      90%     100%
> 38 from 0-10%
> 14 20-40%
> 13 50% (the "I don't know" answer)

50% and "Don't know" should be separated, otherwise, the data risks  
distortion.


> 8 60-80%
> 5 90-100%

Median 15%, Mean 28%


> What I was looking for was the spread between this and the answers to
> Q11-Q13, which demonstrate that people see the difference in the
> chances afforded by modern cryonics procedures.

Scales are different, making comparisons of limited value:

Mean difference is 1.9 or 19%, Highly significant (p<.0001). So,  
people can see the difference.



>
> 3) If >0%, how many years do you think it will be before he is  
> revived?
> 4 _<20
> 16 _20-50
> 15 _50-100
> 13 _100-200
> 1 _200-500
> 2 _>500
> Two people who said 0% to Q2 answered Q3 too (they were the only
> ">500" people).  I think I could combine the two and alleviate
> confusion by having a "Never" choice on Q3.  Basically, people figure
> that if we can revive him at all, we can do it in the next 200 years.

Failure to use an interval scale makes it impossible to test this  
without grouping the data.
Post-hoc grouping eliminates any valid test options.
The best that can be said is that random responding can be rejected  
as an explanation for the last two values.



>
>
> Questions About Frozen Dead Guy Days
>

> 5) The Frozen Dead Guy Days trivialize cryonics and make it look
> ridiculous. 2 Yes / 56 No / 22 Maybe
> It's good to see that No outnumbers Yes and Maybe together by more
> than 2 to 1.

This is post-hoc grouping.

This (Yes) result is significant ( p=.025).

The rest of the questions in this section, About Frozen Dead Guy  
Days,  do not yield sig. results.



>
>
> Questions About Cryonics
> 11) Do you think science will ever allow us to revive anyone
> currently cryonically preserved?

Median = 4
Mean = 4.8
A "Maybe"



>
>
> 12) If so, how many years would you guess it will be before the first
> successful revival?
> 6 _<20
> 23 _20-50
> 20 _50-100
> 15 _100-200
> 3 _200-500
> 3 _>500

Sig. result.



>
>
> 13) If not, how many years do you think it will be before we are able
> to cryonically preserve
> people so that they can be revived at some later date?
> 5 _<20
> 13 _20-50
> 12 _50-100
> 7 _100-200
> 1 _200-500
> 2 _>500
> 5 _Never

Sig. result



> 14) Before Frozen Dead Guy Days 2006, did you know that cryonics is
> accessible to the general
> public (for example, payable by means of a life insurance policy)?
> 36 _Yes   43 _No

NS



>
>
> Questions About You
> 16) What is your current age?
> 7 _<18
> 11 _18-25
> 18 _26-35
> 17 _36-45
> 16 _46-55
> 9 _56-65
> 2 _66-75
> 0 _>75

Sig.



>
> 17) You are: 35_Male      44_Female

NS



>
> 18) How much would you say you enjoy life overall now?
> Not at all
> some
> pretty well
> very much!
> 0     1       2       3       4       5       6       7       8
> 9       10

Median = 9
Mean = 8.3



>
>
> 19) Till what age would you like to live if you could be in good
> health the entire time? (circle one)

Sig.



>
>
> 20) What do you guess the world will be like in the far future,
> compared to today?

NS



>
>
> 21) If money were no object, would you consider cryonic preservation
> for yourself (and, if you
> like, for people you care about)?     9 _Yes   48 _No   21 _Maybe

NS



>
> This graph cross-correlating the answers to Q20 and Q21 corroborates
> the association between optimism about the future and willingness to
> consider cryonics.

There is a trend here, but there isn't enough data to safely say the  
result is valid.



I have not performed any test of the differences between 2005 and  
2006 data, since the data collection procedure was different. This  
makes it impossible to say whether a change results from a different  
procedure or a difference in the population.



dss


David Stodolsky    Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=27746