From: Kathy Marden <Kmarden.nul> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:27:34 -0500 (EST) Archived: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 06:31:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Experiencer Surveys >From: Michael Hughes <michaelmhughes.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 08:43:44 -0500 >Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Experiencer Surveys >>From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> >>To: <post.nul> >>Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:02:16 +0000 >>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Experiencer Surveys <snip> >>It looks to me that I am dealing - on this List - with people >>who have never done a formal study. >>BTW, I am one of the people who called out John Mack in his lack >>of developing a protocol and administering an ICF. He set a bad >>example as to how a researcher should be interacting with >>volunteers. Believed me, he did not set a standard that should >>be replicated. His heart was in the right place, but he ignored >>having a protocol. He or his institution could have been easily >>sued by a volunteer who might have suffered adverse side >>effects. >>As I said, in my view, UFO researchers are wreckless when >>interacting with people willing to volunteer details of their >>experiences. >Au contraire, Kathy. I've worked with a large number of >researchers and postdocs who have conducted surveys, gathering >all sorts of information about everything from food choices to >attitudes about transgenic laboratory mice. None have required >the approval of the IRB that governs the studies with volunteers >which take place at the university, such as the psilocybin >research I've written about, which required extensive and >extremely rigorous review. >But a voluntary information gathering exercise does not require >some kind of psychological screening or approval of an >institution to be ethically sound. Anyone who is uncomfortable >taking a survey can simply choose not to take it. >I'm puzzled by your insistence on the need for institutional >review, and I'm guessing that your personal experiences make you >extra attentive to the needs of experiencers. Nothing wrong with >that, and I applaud your concern, but surveys are conducted all >the time about all sorts of potentially sensitive issues - >without any institutional review. So you are factually >incorrect. First, we want to make it clear that the researchers have had formal training in social research methodology and have issued questionnaires in the past. Kathy sat in on a medical ethics committee meetings as a graduate student. Simple surveys that do not involve interviews or ask for identifying information do not require a signed consent form, as the participants identities are not collected by the researchers. Informed consent implies that more than a simple survey (such as a clinical study), is being conducted. KK is building a mountain out of a mole hill by assuming that the same rules apply to a simple survey as to a complex medical study where drugs are administered to patients and there is interaction between the experimental team and the clinical subjects. The same rules do not apply. Second, although it is not necessary to issue an informed consent form in a simple survey, one has been posted at: www.kathleen-marden.com However, it should only be signed and returned to the researchers in the event that a participant wishes to supply identifying information. No identifying information has been requested from participants taking the simple survey. We would like to include this link for anyone who would be considering a survey of any kind in the future: http://intghc.oxfordjounals.org/content/15/3/261.full Third, we find it important to repeat that when an individual deems it necessary to object to a study, survey, comment, etc., and cannot go immediately to the source of that topic, there is something wrong. They have not done their homework and know absolutely nothing about the background to begin with. When the flat out distortion and misrepresentation of information is disseminated on a public forum, one has to question the writer's motive or failure to understand the facts. Any questions pertaining to the simple survey should be sent directly to those involved, not aired in public as an act of showmanship. Neither Kathy nor I (Denise) care to continue an argument with someone who has no idea of the methods we are using and obviously did not comprehend what our last statement said - to print that we had the participants attending our meeting respond orally or that there was a contamination of information is proof of that. Objectivity is one of the requirements of scientific research. Kathy and Denise are very careful in our protocols to prevent the contamination of information. The interactions between participants at a self-help group are subjective and designed for another purpose. Our detractor wasn't there, and by her statements has demonstrated that she has no earthly idea of what transpired. She is, in fact, entirely wrong in her assumptions. If you have a true interest in helping and not hindering anyone searching for answers to this mystery, why not write us, call us, or interview either one of us about questions beyond the scope of what we have already written? Denise finds that certain personalities tend to enjoy sinking their teeth into many things in an objectionable manner and appear to love doing so out in the open. This is just possibly a way to say "I didn't think of it first", or could there be a hidden agenda, or do they enjoy a good debate? Perhaps this is so simple that you just require an audience? Well we will give you that but won't be a part of it any longer so the final applause is yours to take, we bow out exiting stage left. Kathy can see no useful purpose in responding to individuals who clearly have misinterpreted information and continue to do so, despite our best efforts to elucidate the facts pertaining to our simple survey. It is, likewise, perplexing that anyone would question our right to offer support and understanding to individuals with whom we empathize, especially with my background in social work and my extensive knowledge of abduction and Denise's outstanding background in the UFO and abduction field. Anyone who feels that this is an important part of discovering some small common thread among abductees, hence one small step forward - please help us out and respond to the survey. If you don't, please just ignore it. We are here to answer questions if you have any. Please go directly to the source for the whys and wherefores. As Stanton Friedman has said quite a few times in words more eloquent than ours, who would want to make themselves known to us if they are from another planet? Those are our thoughts exactly. We have never learned to treat each other with common decency. Perhaps when we learn to settle our differences in a humane and gentle fashion, we will have earned the right to be introduced to the cosmic kindergarten. Sincerely, Kathy Marden and Denise Stoner Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp