The document summarizes a vulnerability assessment exercise of evaluating two targets: the Fairbanks International Airport and the Golden Valley Electric Association. It discusses following the classmate's logic for their vulnerability assessments of the five components - location, accessibility, on-site hazards, familiarity, and layers of defense. While the same components would be evaluated, additional assessments of individual assets and expanded vulnerability scores would be included, along with analyzing mitigation options. Fear could be measured using an ordinal scale where respondents rate their level of fear from very fearful to not fearful.

1. Surname 1
Student Name
Lecture’s Name
Course Name
Date Submitted
Vulnerability Assessment
1. REVIEW A VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT EXERCISE OF A CLASSMATE AND
PROVIDE CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK. CAN YOU FOLLOW THEIR LOGIC FOR
THE ASSESSMENTS THEY PROVIDED? WOULD YOU ASSESS THE
VULNERABILITIES FOR THEIR TARGETS THE SAME?
a) Assignment Overview
The exercise evaluates the susceptibility of two targets: the Fairbanks International Airport (FIA)
and the Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA). It gives a brief summary of the two targets
regarding the location, the services they offer, and the vulnerability levels of the targets (Word
1).
b) Can you follow their logic for the assessments they provided?
I can follow the methodology. The vulnerability assessment focuses on five components of each
target: location, accessibility, on-site hazards, familiarity, and the layers of defense. The
evaluation rates the vulnerability for each element using three scores: high, medium and low
(Word 2-4).
c) Would you assess the vulnerabilities for their targets the same?
In my assessment, I would evaluate the same components: location, accessibility, on-site
hazards, familiarity, and the layers of defense. However, I would also assess the vulnerability of
each asset in the targets. The firms have several assets such as electrical appliances, buildings,
planes, automobiles, and fire alarm systems. Each asset has different vulnerability scores, and I
would evaluate them independently (Telenbaum). I would also expand the vulnerability score
sheet to include ‘very high’ and ‘very low’ scores. ‘Very high’ would denote losses that would
have extremely grave consequences, while ‘very low’ would describe injuries that have less
severe costs. I would also analyze the mitigation options available. Each process has associated
risks (Telenbaum). Because vulnerability assessment involves using entities that may not be
direct, I would make some assumptions. (Word 3)
2. HOW WOULD YOU MEASURE FEAR? WHAT TYPE O F SCALE WOULD YOU
USE (E.G., NOMINAL, INTERVAL, RATIO, ORDINAL)? WHAT WOULD BE THE
UNITS?
No statistical measurement can quantify the level of fear in an individual. Most risk analysis
approaches involve numbers with simple computations (Slide 2). However, I could use
epidemiology (Gray and Ropeik 1). This process involves examining the health outcome of
individuals exposed to a health hazard such as fear. Analysts use four different types of scales to
evaluate the nature of the threat: nominal, ordinal, interval and ratio scales (Slide 6). The
nominal scale uses labels and categories without any quantitative value. The categories have no
order between them (Creative Heuristics). Ordinal scale positions categories in logical and
reasonable ranks. Interval scale uses actual values and specifies the intervals between the values.
However, it does not have the absolute zero value. Ratio scale has the absolute zero (Slide 6).
When assessing the level of fear in individuals, I would use the ordinal scale. Each respondent in

2. Surname 2
a statistical sample would rate the degree of concern on an ordinal scale (Slide 11). Below is an
example of such a scale.
What is your level of fear?
1 Very fearful
2 Somewhat fearful
3 Fearful
4 Not fearful
I would then apply a measure of central tendency such as the mode to approximate the degree of
fear in the sample. Since an ordinary scale has no values, it has no units (Slide 6).
3. LIST FIVE MEASUREMENT SCALES YOU USE IN YOUR DAILY LIFE (E.G.,
WHAT TYPE OF SCALES ARE THEY (NOMINAL, INTERVAL, RATIO, AND
ORDINAL)? WHAT MAKES THESE SCALES USEFUL IN YOUR LIFE?
There are various types of measurement scales. They include the metric scale, the Fahrenheit
scale, the Celsius scale, the Kelvin scale, the geologic time scale, and the Likert scale. The
Fahrenheit, Celsius, and the Kelvin scales are examples of interval scales used to measure
temperature (Blahzinga). The geologic time scale is an interval scale (Blahzinga) that describes
historical dates that relating geological. The Likert scale is an ordinal scale that assigns
quantitative values to qualitative data. It is useful in determining the view of a statistical sample
on a particular subject. The scale uses different scores such as ‘agree,' ‘strongly agree,' ‘disagree’
and ‘strongly disagree.'

3. Surname 3
Works cited
“Scales of Measurement: Nominal, Ordinal, Interval and Ratio Scales Explained.” YouTube,
uploaded by Blahzinga, 22 Apr. 2014,
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL38g06DbSc&noredirect=1
“Types of Data: Nominal, Ordinal, Interval/Ratio - Statistics Help.” YouTube, uploaded by
Statistics Learning Centre, 13 Dec. 2011, www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZxnzfnt5v8
Gray George, and David Ropeik. “What, me worry?” Boston, MA, USA: Mifflin, 2001.
Telenbaum Joash.“The Illusion of Certainty: Risk, Probability, and Chance.” YouTube, uploaded
by World Science Festival, 7 Jan. 2015, www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcMuYhoL38A