1. Leadership – Four questions to determine if military leaders feel public affairs is a valuable team member.  The questions attempt to define whether leaders understand PA’s roles and responsibilities, and will seriously accept input from the public affairs staff. 

2. Utility -- Three questions are used to determine if military leaders feel public affairs is a viable tool prior to a crisis.  The questions focus on whether PA should be used as a proactive tool, included in the entire planning stage of an operation, and if public affairs practitioners are accorded the same amount of respect as other professions with in the military.

3. Training – Three questions concerning whether training is deemed a requirement for public affairs practitioners.  These questions ask if training is required prior to being assigned to a public affairs position, and whether service members are given PA responsibilities as a secondary job.

     The data derived from both the pretest and posttest will be compared using an ANOVA to assess significant differences in the means between the pretest and posttest scores. Additionally, subscales will be reduced to a composite score for correlation comparisons between the dimensions of the attitude survey.  As an example, if researchers discover a correlation between a leader’s comprehensive understanding of public affairs’ roles and responsibilities and public affairs’ utility during the planning stage of an operation, researchers may be able to predict a positive perception by leaders of public affairs. 

Limitations
      This study proposes a convenience sample of servicemembers attending selected leadership schools.  Although, these samples are presumed to represent the population, the practice of convenient sampling has been disputed by behavioral scientists who argue that they may not be representative (Infante, Rancer & Womack, 1997).

      A second limitation is the regression threat to internal validity.  Regression tends to move subjects toward the mean.  It occurs when retesting the same group.  The central thought is that subjects are able to identify what is being tested and therefore try to answer accordingly.

      A third limitation is there is very little research available on how public affairs is actually utilized or perceived by military leadership.  There are numerous case studies, after action reports, and personal examples; however, they have not been researched.  

Projected Results
       Following the pre-test experiment, a finding of no variance among the two platoons within each school is expected.  Another projected result should be that the leadership subjects do not understand the proper roles, use, or management of  public affairs practitioners resulting in a loss of credibility by the PA profession.  Following the treatment and post-test, the platoon receiving the treatment should have a better understanding of how to manage PA assets.  However, there should be no variance in the control group platoons.

      The measurement for success in this study includes receiving permission to, and conducting the experiment.  A second measurement for success is finding a lack of understanding regarding roles, uses, and management of public affairs after the pre-test survey.  A third measurement is that following treatment, a significant variance should occur between the treatment and control groups.

Introduction

Literature Review

Stage 1

Stage 2

Participants 

Experiment

Analysis

Limitations

Projected Results

Discussion

References