QTRA - I'm sorry i don't agree with it!

[RobArb]

I shall argue that to focus on isolated aspects of risk, as is most often the case in studies interested in collecting quantitative data, is rather superficial, and ignores the collective context within which this risk takes place. Given that research is something which happens in this collective context, the objectivity of the researcher, central to traditional methods, is seen as essentially biased by interpretation. As singular arbs studying trees, researchers necessarily have attitudes and values which they bring to their research

[Amelanchier]

Had to google 'qualitative' I skipped it earlier.

 

 

= relating to, measuring, or measured by the quality of something rather than its quantity: Often contrasted with quantitative.

 

And there's me thinking you cared:001_smile:

 

I take it you mean that the use of statistics, as in a quantitative thing....but used for a qualitative perameter is therefore subjective...thus proving your point:thumbup1:

 

You'll have to leave this one with me for a while Tony:thumbup1:

 

No worries. Seriously though, I'm glad the cat got a walk!

[RobArb]

took me a while to type that!

[Albedo]

Fair enough. When you do, just ask yourself if it doesn't just do the exact same thing as QTRA. You add points together (with an element of subjective input) and come up with a figure which you hold up against a threshold for deciding action.

 

I think the biggest issue QTRA faces is that people think that it pretends to offer objective precision and they rightly know that it can't.

 

That takes us back to HCR's point which was quite eloquent and got a bit ignored.

 

Orca's glad you're glad he got a walk...cats are the best stress relief there is:001_smile:

Edited November 27, 2012 by Albedo
one apostrophe out of place

[Albedo]

I've inwardly absorbed all this now...

 

QTRA is a subjective assessment using numbers to fraudulently obtain objective credibility....

 

Is this a fair assessment?

[RobArb]

I've inwardly absorbed all this now...

 

QTRA is a subjective assessment using numbers to fraudulently obtain objective credibility....

 

Is this a fair assessment?

 

i like it:thumbup:

[Amelanchier]

took me a while to type that!

 

And it hangs together well although I don't agree with your point.

[Amelanchier]

I've inwardly absorbed all this now...

 

QTRA is a subjective assessment using numbers to fraudulently obtain objective credibility....

 

Is this a fair assessment?

 

Nope, five words too long.

 

QTRA is a subjective assessment using numbers.

 

But I would score that as a 2 on the libel scale...

[daltontrees]

Wow, you guys are giving this subject a good seeing to!

 

I amn't sure what this QTRA is, is it that sysstem devised by Forbes Laird that you have to pay for to get a license to use?

 

This winter I am surveying around 8,000 trees for a nearby local authority. The contract specifies (words to this effect) that trees must pass the 1:10,000 risk of serious harm test or works must be specified to bring the tree within that probability. Evey single day for every single day I quantify the risk, there is no scope for pontification about the benefits or drawbacks of statistics or the question of whether a tree is Ok or not. It either passes or fails the threshold. And the more I have read your interesting and entertaining debat the more I am reassured that (i) without quantification of risk the whole business is impossible and (ii) most aspects of quantification are not that hard really.

 

Read any survey report, if the author is worth a tosser the report will make it very clear (i.e. not just buried in the small print and disclaimers) that there is no such thing as a safe tree and that the report can only try and predict that the likelihood of harm is or is not above the threshold of acceptibility.

 

The difficulty therefore lies often with the lack of client/public understanding with the limitations (and I don't mean cop-outs) of tree surveys and reports.

 

That's my view anyway. It keeps me sane out on survey day after day after day.... when otherwise I would go ga ga.

[daltontrees]

Sorry that should say 'every single day for every single tree'