below is a response to questions asked in a forum. I am looking for a to what one would think of the answers provided. If possible could there be a Biblical and2 peer reviewed references used.

1. In order to identify the constructs and concepts used in the study, it requires the clear definition of the terms. Concepts and constructs are used to define and summarize measurable attributes expressed by individuals when detailing values and/or experiences. Schindler states "A concept is a collection of meanings associated with certain events, objects, situations, or behaviors." (Schindler (n.d.). The concepts are combined to generate a construct. The construct provides the direction for the researcher. In this case study, State Farm generated the constructs of dangerous intersections and proactive road safety. These constructs led to the useful definition of the accidents, vehicles, intersecting roads, traffic volume, and prevention of loss.

2. The creation of a hypothesis to drive the research on one of the intersections would be vital. The Journal of Emerging Investigators states how hypotheses are "clear, testable, falsifiable, and serves as the basis for constructing a clear set of experiments "(Guidelines for Hypothesis-Driven Research. (n.d). A plausible hypothesis could research the factors that contribute to accidents at intersections. Thus, State Farm could generate a research design that would provide detail into the appropriate scope, controls, and use of data collection techniques to establish creditable data. State Farm can choose that its primary data source be its internal data warehouse or the general census data provided detailing accidents in the country.

3. Ephesians 4:5 states "Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to your neighbor, for we are all members of one body". God requires people to practice actions that support his instructions and wants from us. It is with this theory, that State Farm's research must exhibit a formal process that can be verified in its research design. Initially, State Farm can develop a reasonable research question about dangerous intersections by gauging the primary data in its data warehouse. Unfortunately, the dataset is limited and does not provide a significant sample of the target group. Then the firm uses reports from field surveying provided by adjusters, to capture ex post facto data on accidents regarding the intersection. After the initial data was collected, State Farm performs an evaluation to select the proper criteria to base its case. State Farm decided to exclude all accidents that occurred with in an intersection of a road and on-ramp for a highway. The first study conducted by State Farm only focuses the organizations own insured drivers who were at fault. The data would certainly be affected by this but the organization made a relevant decision to do so. They also disregarded the severity of the accident severity which enabled them to provide more comprehensive data. To disband inaccurate details in reported information, the firm did not implement police reports. The structure and detail of the reports were not consistent between different police agencies and jurisdictions. These measures were adopted to provide a probability sample to enhance better results, accuracy, and greater speed of data collection. Upon the study completion and public evaluation, State Farm requested transportation engineers to create a multi-point scale to measure accident severity and create insight from the payout average of claims ranging from high and low severity groups.

4. At the end of the initial 1998 study, State Farm received much public appreciation on its evaluation of dangerous intersections. However, transportation engineers took issue to the study. The engineers needed to be able to provide solutions to the public and travelers. They also wanted more exact data regarding accidents leading to injuries and death, and that consideration be made for intersection volume and accident rates. State Farm could assist by implementing a multi-method research approach. It would include focus groups and creating surveys for transportation engineers. Initially, the firm would need to do a comparison of accidents in cities with high and minimal accident occurrences. State Farm could then draw conclusions from cities with less accident frequency on their combating intersection issues. Using the data from the 1998 study, State Farm could then utilize focus groups with experts from the most effective cities. This would assist in the determination of the best preventative methods that could be implemented.

5. It would not be recommended for the firm to utilize traffic counts as part of the study. The source of data from traffic volume counts would generate significant costs and not be effective enough to justify the cost. Collecting traffic volume counts would require State Farm to purchase equipment to capture the information and bring on experienced traffic count researchers. In addition, a study this vast and detailed may require more than the initial attempt. Traffic count volume may also provide new extraneous variables that will complicate and invalidate the original data.