analysis of results pwp

Download Analysis of results pwp

Post on 09-Feb-2017




1 download

Embed Size (px)


Survey Results Analysis Animal Cruelty in Horse Racing

Observation71% of the people who took part in the survey were female.

What this tells me about my audienceThere may not be any real reason for these results other than more women saw the survey than men. I tried to distribute the survey into communities with even splits of male and female audiences. It is also possible that out of the people who saw the survey, female audience members were more likely to investigate and compete it. Perhaps this is because the survey is ordinated around being caring towards animals and caring in general. Women in general tend to empathise more with animals than men. Judging from my research I should be targeting a female audience. Although the male 30% is not to be ignored.

How this will impact my posterThe plan is to shock the audience into cutting off contact with the races. This makes it difficult to target the poster in a females based colour scheme, structure and tone. If my poster is designed to shock it may be appropriate to got down the route of relative gore, noting extreme. This will incite the desired feeling of disgust at the sport. The audience is not supposed to feel comfortable looking at the poster.

Observation50% of the audience are 16-20, most of who said they do not attend the races at any time. What this tells me about my audience Very few results have come in which it a way tells me a lot in itself. With only 14 results in total for the survey it shows me that it is not a subject the concerns or interests most people. The survey was distributed on as big a scale as was possible without any form of budget though the internet. Primarily on Facebook and Twitter. Many people will have seen the survey, noticed the subject and decided it did not interest them. Is this because they do not worry about how the horses are treated or because they think they are treated with respect. This gives me the determination to inform people on the matter. How this will impact my poster When comparing the other answers for different ages there seams to be little correlation between age and point of view. This tells me that i should spread the survey everywhere I can. Although having gained the most responses from a younger audience i should consider them my main audience. I should consider posting my poster in schools and colleges.

Observations Rounded to 65% a strong majority of my audience never attend the races. This is likely to be due to a younger average age of audience. Going to the races is not something that is done at a young age, especially if under 18 is betting is not legal at this age. This may have impacted my results slightly. Although they are still important to the survey, they may be thinking of going when older. 6 in 7 16-20 year olds said they never attend the races, while in contrast 1 in 7 said they never go. The rest of the audience that have selected that they do not go to the races frequently, excluding a minority who go more often.

What this tells me about my audience The younger audience does not currently attend the races. If they do plan to go in the future my campaign should put them off. The distribution of the results amongst the options tells me that my audience is not very enthusiastic about horse racing. Although despite this there is no correlation between this statistic and whether people said they would cut off contact with the races. Frequently they would reply with No or sadly no.

How this will impact my posterThis shows me that people who do not even got to the races amongst those who do still feel that they will keep contact with the races. People seam to consider the races too important to abandon for the sake of the animals. It is a major part of english culture, the piece of information that stands out to me the result which the participant replied sadly no showing knowledge and understanding of the races cruelty and despite that continuing as if unaware. I can turn this to my advantage to orientate my campaign around deliberate ignorance. For example I could caption my poster with the phrase Is ignorance always bliss? as the image displays a member of the crowd choosing to ignore a fallen horse as they look on to the winner with ticket in hand. Only an idea although this does give me valuable information as to where my audience stands.

ObservationIn comparison to question 3 far more people have selected that they do make bets on the races than the amount of people that actually attend the events. 42% of the audience clicked that they bet On Occasion this is likely to mean they bet on big events such as the Grand National that come around less often but attract a bigger and less enthusiastic audience. The fact that is the most shocking is that 64% of people do bet on the races meaning that there is an enormous audience that can be targeted. That may not even be the full extent of the fan base for the sport.What this tells me about my audienceIf the survey is narrowed down to only those who never bet on the races it can be seen that 80% of these participants are in the 16-20 age bracket. This may be because they are not permitted to gamble. In hindsight it may have been more beneficial not to merge the age boundary between legal and illegal. For example I should have had a 17 and under option on this question. In a qualitative question (question 9) 40% of all who said they never bet on the races said they would not cut off contact with either therefore backing up the evidence that they are not concerned with the horses wellbeing.

How this will impact my poster A large proportion of the statistics gathered have indicated that people will only bet on the races on occasion. It might make sense to base my campaign around these occasional events that attract people only betting for a little bit of fun. If i target events like the grand National and the Cheltenham festival this specific group of people may be more put off the sport. This could be the part of the market I aim at, rather than aiming at enthusiasts which consist of the 21% of the people in the survey. These people are far more likely to think better not in the situation of a little bet. If i were to go down this route it would result in a purely UK based campaign as the event are unique to this country and would have less impact on international recipients. According to my survey this part of the the market would appear to be the majority of people who place bets on horses. While I think this is true, i must consider that i only had 14 participants for the survey. While i did get a good variety if age and gender, there was a clear majority of younger people involved. This group of people are traditionally less invested in horse racing culture.

ObservationsOf the people who chose to answer the question 72% (8 out of 11) believe that the horses are not treated humanly. Meaning 28% think they are treaded in a acceptable manner. These two statistics can be learned from. But the third option is more relevant. 21% of people felt they did not know enough about the subject to give an answer. These people can be easily informed about this information in the same way that those who think the set up in justified can be converted.What this tells me about my audience To me this displays that there is a gap in the audience that does not know about the controversial happenings to horses. This justifies the need for a campaign on the subject. People who are not informed on the subject could be given a few hard to handle facts about the sport which may serve as enough to put them on our side. The majority of people seam to be aware that the sport is deadly of horses, or they just expect that they would not be treated as a priority. The sport is a business like an other. Assets are exploited in business especially when animals are involved. Animals do not have a voice to speak for themselves therefore organisations must do it for them. That is the objective of my poster.How this will influence my poster This will influence not influence my poster from an aesthetic point of view however it gives me an incite as to how it should be distributed. There is no correlation between age and gender when compared to the results of this question. Suggesting that everyone is in a situation where they need to be informed on the subject.

ObservationsNo one who took the survey predicted that 0-5 horses have died in the grand national. The vast majority believed 20+ had died with 57% agreeing.

What this tells me about my audience The audience overall expected the rate to be high. They might be well informed on the topic or expect the horses to be treated as a tool. One of the participants stated they already knew that in a following question relating to this fact. Perhaps some of the people who took the survey are already knowledgable how the animals are handled. If i select to look at only this persons results they say they go 1-3 times a year, but by the end have decided that the races should be banned. Although interestingly that they feel they should cut off contact with the races but wont. Does this statistic effect whether you will have any contact with horse racing in the future? the reply was It should, but it doesnt.

How this will influence my poster This again reinforces the theory I made when analysing a previous question that the poster should be oriented around how it is easier to pretend it is not happening and to continue as normal. The idea is to create a feeling of guilt for ignoring this and continuing to directly fund this cruel sport. Another point I can draw from this result is that people seam not to be too shocked by the amount of deaths related to the sport. It seams to be expected. I could work on how this is worse than it may seam. A poster showing the GB athletics team