Introduction
The United States’ boundaries play a crucial role in governance, politics, economic, and social aspects. For example, Swanson and O’Connell (2016) noted that the boundaries shape taxes, employer benefits, healthcare services, education policies, and schools, among others. Despite these differences, unique shape, and the importance of each state as part of the country, few Americans can name all the 50 states on a map. To test this assertion, an experiment was conducted to determine how many states people can identify and label on a map.
Method
To meet the study’s objective, 14 participants were recruited randomly to take part in the experiment. There were eight males and six females, with an average age of 24 years. Only one respondent in age groups 15-20 and 50+, while others had two subjects. All the individuals were English speakers, so they understood the aim of the research without any help. Further, five completed the master’s program, eight were undergraduate students, and one graduated from high school.
The experiment was designed to measure the number of states respondents can correctly or incorrectly label on a map. Pre-test and post-test design, which measures subjects in terms of the dependent variable, was used in the experiment (Babbie, 2017). The stimulus in this test was a map with all USA states named, which also formed the independent variable. The dependent variable was the ability to identify and mark the member states on the provided blank map. Therefore, a blank USA map was provided to every participant, which they had to fill the map in exactly five minutes. Another map with all 50 states named was offered for the subjects to study in five minutes, thus exposing them to a stimulus as required in the pre-test and post-test approach. The participants were then provided with another blank map where they had five minutes to fill on the map. The results for pre-test and post-test were calculated by counting the number of correctly and incorrectly labeled states in each stage.
Results
The conditions for the research were all similar for the men and women in the group. Therefore, the results were not biased against one gender or age group during the interview. On average, the participants correctly identified 23 states on the map, with three people labeling all 50 states, and the lowest score was six in the first attempt. Additionally, three participants were confused between Hawaii and Alaska, but there was no confusion during the post-test. After exposure to the stimulant, seven people labeled all the states correctly, five participants scored between 38 and 49, and only two subjects identified less than 35 states in the second attempt.
Texas, California, Florida, Washington, Alaska, New York, Nevada, New Mexico, and Hawaii were the most commonly labeled states. On the other hand, the most incorrect or unidentified states were Minnesota, Iowa, Maryland, Connecticut, Wisconsin, Delaware, and Indiana. The findings also indicate age groups 26-30, 15-20, and 36-40 scored highest, followed by 21-25, 46-50, 31-35, 50+, and the least performer was 41-45. Appendixes A and B display the aggregate scores for all 14 participants in the first and second attempts, respectively. Appendixes C and D show the findings of five participants during pre-test and post-test, respectively.
Conclusion
The purpose of the experiment was to examine the geographic knowledge of USA member states. The objective of the research was achieved by interviewing 14 participants using a pre-test and post-test design. The findings revealed that labeling the states correctly on a map improved when the subjects were exposed to a stimulant. This finding is consistent with the assertions raised by Babbie (2017), who argued that subjects respond to questionnaires differently in the second attempt. The reason for higher performance in the second attempt is that the respondents had ample time to study the map as they prepared for the post-test interview. Additionally, Synenko (2018) indicated geospatial memory is enhanced through the intense personal experience of having embodied a spatial reality. Therefore, personal experiences of visiting each state and prior knowledge of map studies boosted the ability for participants to label all states in the first attempt correctly.
References
Babbie, E. R. (2017). The basics of social research (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Swanson, A., & O’Connell, J. (2016). What the U.S. map should really look like. The Washington Post.
Synenko, J. (2018). Geospatial memory: An introduction. Media Theory, 2(1), 1-31.