This example gets students thinking about how we operationalize variables. Psychologists operationalize a lot of abstract stuff. Intelligence. Grit. But what about something that seems more firmly grounded and countable, like whether or not a crime meets the criteria for a a mass shooting?
How do we define mass shooting?
As shared in this article by Chris Wilson for Time Magazine, the official definition is 1) three or more people 2) killed in a public setting. That is per the current federal definition of a mass shooting.
But that isn't universally excepted by media outlets. The article shares different metrics used for identifying a mass shooting, depending on what source is being used. Whether or not to include a dead shooter towards the total number killed. Whether or not the victims were randomly selected.
I think the most glaring example from the article has to do with the difference that this definition makes on mass shooting counts:
You could also discuss with students how they would define it, what parameters would be important, and research questions that might require a firm definition.
How do we define mass shooting?
As shared in this article by Chris Wilson for Time Magazine, the official definition is 1) three or more people 2) killed in a public setting. That is per the current federal definition of a mass shooting.
But that isn't universally excepted by media outlets. The article shares different metrics used for identifying a mass shooting, depending on what source is being used. Whether or not to include a dead shooter towards the total number killed. Whether or not the victims were randomly selected.
I think the most glaring example from the article has to do with the difference that this definition makes on mass shooting counts:
You could also discuss with students how they would define it, what parameters would be important, and research questions that might require a firm definition.
Comments
Post a Comment