Final Summary/Reaction

The first part of my research was quite successful, with a total of 144 responses over the span of two days (although this is still to small a pool, most likely). Of course, the people sampled did not represent the average composition of the United States. My survey was 68% female, only 24% male, and had an incredible 17% of people indicate the "other" option! This reflects some sort of self-selecting bias, as does the fact that almost 20% of the survey respondents were LGBTQIA. What I expected to find was a very black-and-white correlation between being or knowing someone who were part of the acronym and having accurate knowledge of the issues, and those who did not and had biased and ignorant opinions. Instead, I found social networks mean that almost everyone polled in the survey knew someone who was queer--only 2% of respondents did not know someone queer. However, some correlation was present. Those who belong to one of the groups, or had close friends who belonged to said groups, or knew many such people, where more likely to not only answer correctly but also have more liberal-minded opinions. (This warrants a digression on the nature of the questions I asked. During the course of writing the survey I decided last second to make the questions seem more opinion based. In a constantly evolving and highly debated like Gender Studies, many of the facts associated with the topic aren't as readily verifiable as those found in hard science, meaning that opinions affect one's knowledge and visa versa. That said, this also help to shed light on implicit opinions and bias people wouldn't normally want to share).  However, as the amount of and closeness to queer people decreased, the amount of knowledge also tended to decrease quite dramatically (I have yet to plot it out in detail but I am thinking along the lines of a depreciation curve (e^-x) type shape).

I also learned that people did not always have knowledge in all areas equally; those picking the correct answers in one area (bisexuality)  could put some really incorrect and offensive answers about trans* people!

My other study was a lot less successful, as I only got six people to participate in it. I found that overall people had trouble switching pronouns, especially when using the neologism "ze". When using they they tended to make 0-2 mistakes when reading the paragraph. When using ze however, they made many errors and one person basically just gave up before finishing the assignment (they did not know why they were doing it, however). The time that it took different people to do each part of the task varied widely, especially between native speakers two non-native speakers.  The three respondents who did know they were doing it were only slightly slower. This, in a much larger study could indicate that new pronouns are difficult mostly because they are hard to integrate into language and not because of bias; however, the people I was able to wrangle into doing the test where self-selecting and therefore probably wanted to succeed at the "Pronoun Game" regardless of whether or not they completed the open-ended survey/information page. I have a feeling that in real life, especially in the busy world, people would be less amenable to learning something new, especially if they felt the pronouns weren't legitimate.

This research was the culmination of an interesting semester in which I got a new perspective on issues which I already had found interesting. While Gender/Sexuality studies are something I've exposed myself to for almost two years, learning sociological concepts showed me the inner structure and rules from where emerged many of the things I learned. It has allowed me to argue and discuss in a more informed manner, and I honestly wish I to pursue my interesting in sociology in a major way in college if it is possible. To remember that humans are social animals governed, in many ways, but a nebulous set of behavioral patterns set forth by a society, has given me new perspectives on the people around me. Honestly, considering things like group-think, I am surprised we have not messed up more! (I suppose that isn't the normal observation one would pull from a sociology class.) I am extremely glad to have done my own research and I was honestly amazed by all the details and connections that emerged from the data pool as it grew larger. I was very exciting to watch the numbers grow and to see how percentages changed as the survey reached different groups of people. I am sad to leave this blog behind, but rest assured that I will not forget to keep learning about the FORGOTTEN LETTERS.

Research Part 3

I have revised my plane to include 2  or 3 myth based questions about each group, then I will allow users to select from a list of way they learned the information. They will be allowed to select more than one answer. I will limit the survey to under twenty questions, or around 15 questions. I will be focusing on the myths like I said because I feel that unlearning misinformation is a strong sign of knowledge in a topic area. 

For the experimental part of the exercise, I will split my people into two groups. One group will do the assignment without being told why they are doing it. The other group will have the idea of epicene pronouns explained to them. Of those in the second group, I will ask them to fill out a brief about their opinions on non-male or female pronouns. I will then see if feelings of bias against non-binary people will affect the time. My revised hypothesis is that those who feel favorably will do a bit better than the control group, and those who do not feel favorably or doubt the legitimacy of the group will actually do a lot worse. I will be using a text from Alice in Wonderland.

Research Part Two

For the general knowledge survey of my research, I will be collecting data using Google Forms. This will allow people more access to it, will allow me to export my information as an Excel Document, and will allow for greater anonymity. I  plan to start by asking for age, gender (with male, female and other (fill-in) options). Then I will ask around ten questions about bisexuals, trans* people, asexuals, and intersex people. I will mainly be focusing on general and accurate knowledge and the perception of certain myths as wrong. Then I will ask one or two questions about how the people learned this information, with an emphasis on thier knowing or being a queer person.

For my experiment, I will sit down with people in a busy cafeteria setting and ask them to read one text with first female pronouns, then "they pronouns" and then "ey" pronouns. The purpose of the busy setting is seeing if people can still learn quickly in a distracting environment. Because they are reading the text three times, this gives them a bit of an advantage on later tries, which will somewhat compensate for the difficult pronouns. I will have both the text to be read with blanks and the pronouns displayed easily where the person can refer to them. I will time them with a stopwatch and I will also count the nature and amount of errors they make (using the wrong tense, using the wrong set of pronouns).

Research Part One

I will be doing a survey testing people's knowledge of queer minorities. I will be putting particular focus On differentiating between popular myths from actual truth. I will also be asking them if they know someone who is queer or if they are queer themselves. the purpose of this study will be to elucidate the relationship between knowing about The Forgotten letters and where  this information is coming from.

I will also be doing a short experiment where I will ask people to read a short paragraph while substituting in gender neutral pronouns for the traditional male or female pronouns. The purpose of this experiment will be to find out which epicene pronouns are easier to use and how difficult it is for the average person to integrate a new pronoun into their vocabulary.

My hope with both of these research methods will be to not only find out information but to sensitize my subjects to information that they are not aware of.