Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Path: news.jprc.com!newsfeed.sgi.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.enteract.com!ix.netcom.com!rah
From: rah@netcom.com (Richard Hyde)
Subject: Re: 1 or 2 Hands on Yoke? - clarrification
Message-ID: <rahF83BDH.GMI@netcom.com>
Organization: ICGNetcom
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <rahF82x0s.J6H@netcom.com> <7bn0lc$vr2@dixie.tagsys.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 21:51:17 GMT
Lines: 41
Sender: rah@netcom4.netcom.com
Xref: news.jprc.com rec.aviation.student:48730

Andrew Gideon (ag7337@tagsys.com) wrote:

: >I see what you are saying.  I enjoyed reading your analysis of
: >the brake problem, but I think you may be over analyzing the test.
: >It's an *FAA* test, right?  :-)
: >

: This is a bad sign.  Any time "excess" analysis "ruins" a question or 
: a test, this is indicative of a flaw.  There must be a mininum level
: of analysis.  There must not be a maximum.

Generally, I would agree with you.  However in this particular
test, the only answer a reasonable person would give is "None
of the above".  It's a psychological test designed to ferret
out which of the five hazardous attitudes the test taker *might*
be vulnerable to in a less clear cut situation.

Is it valid? Beats me.  I was turned down for graduate school
in psychology because all I had was a computer science background.
<laughing all the way to the bank :-)>

: This is on top of the basic poor premise I see behind questions like
: these.  Each question proposes a scenario, and then asks why you followed
: the prescribed path.  But this completely discounts the "I wouldn't!"
: choice.  It also discounts any other choice not listed (ie. "landing
: at the destination is safer because the runway is longer").

It discounts the "I wouldn't" because that would be the only
choice selected. It doesn't allow you to invent alternate
scenarios because that doesn't elicit a hazardous attitude.

: Asking someone to justify a choice they'd not made is a good exercise
: in a debating class, but that's about all.

and in a psychology test...

-- 
Include "wombat" in Subject: line of mail sent to me [to override spamgard(tm)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   Richard Hyde  |  RaH@netcom.com  |  This space intentionally left blank  |  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
