An obvious issue, it seems to me, is the small sample size for the baseline. The baseline comprises two example cases and three people. Is this strong enough to establish a pattern?
My knowledge of psychological research is nonexistent, so I'm asking this out of total ignorance: Is it acceptable practice to use a small sample size, when the circumstances require it? Does it affect how we view the conclusions?
Super question, Brian. And BTW, I would invite you to strike the word "ignorance" relative to anything you wrote in your posting. You're the type of "student" that profs dream about having!
No question that language informaton from 100 lost aviators in life-threatening situations would be preferred to the three lost aviators I reported. For example, with this larger "norm group," there might not have been any of the sequence patterning (i.e., Desperation follows Objective and Subjective) found in the LBG and Lancaster diaries. In that event, I am not sure where I would have taken the research…if anywhere! My point being that in science, there is no such thing as too much data.
Frankly, I was able to find only three cases with the needed bulllet points: professional aviators, lost, few survival assets, incommunicado in a life-threatening situation (as per heat and absence of fresh water), and producing enough language to be scored. One thing I particularly like about Ric's understanding of science is that scientific knowledge is not static, but rather an organic, growing thing. Indeed, one reason that I was happy that Ric posted my work was to see if Forum members might offer more "Lady Be Good" cases (that I might have overlooked). Also, do my findings pertain to other types of cases, like people trapped unto death in freezing situations or in lifeboat situations; the tough part is the necessity that some sort of language record is needed for scoring and comparing to baseline.
I may have some more info on the baseline question soon. My bookfinding service alerted me that a copy of an out of print book on the psychology of extreme situations has been found in England, and I ordered it…arrival in a couple of weeks I'm told by the middleman….I keep my fingers crossed. The book may have info relevant to your small baseline question.
Thanks for your close attention to my work, Brian. Perhaps your analytical mind might be more at ease with the synopsis that this Ford fellow presented somewhat limited evidence suggesting that Amelia Earhart may have been the person who made transmissions from a place that might have been Nikumararo. Such dubiousness, BTW, has a postive effect on most scientists through motivating them to make their cases even more compelling and bullet-proof.
It's working on me
right now.
Guthrie
