Good point, I suppose putting them at the end decreases or removes some potential problems with including these questions, such as that they might lead people to drop out. Every single question should be optional, just like last year.

We could ask people what they attribute their diet change to. Same with donation changes. (Disclaimer: Clearly I don't claim self-reports are fully reliable, but there is usually some signal in them.)

People might also feel judged if asked how much they donate, but asking this is part of assessing what part of EA principles they're adopting, and how effective EA is at actually driving behavior change in self-identified EAs, which is sort of the point of the survey.

EA is kinda inherently judgey in this way.

'have you found conversations with effective altruists persuasive?'(y/n/haven't talked/mixed) 'Why so?' (freetext)

I'd upvote this one, as I'd use the results for my work creating new EA presences.

If its beyond a certain threshold, a few questions getting their subjective cost/QALY (or equivalent) estimates for AMF, Dwtw, SCI, givedirectly and their best alternative bet in freetext might be interesting. I have the feeling that people's subjective estimates are quite variable.

Seems like making this a forced choice might mean you lose people from completing the survey.

Let's not do this.

This question would be more valuable when it makes clear that it asks for an assessment for the specific respondent at that time. Something like “Do you believe that for you at the moment it is better to act now or invest to act better later?” Then the answers could be faceted by age, student status, or other applicable demographic data (if the power is sufficient).

Some may also consider external factors like the availability of vaccines or progress of prioritization research, but for most the personal factors will probably weigh heavier in this decision, and we wouldn’t be able to distinguish that afterwards.

I think a question measuring reflectiveness could also be interesting ala the Cognitive Reflection Test.

?

False dichotomy. Perhaps 2 questions here, 1 about diversity, 1 about strength of committment. Example wording (Likert responses?) "How much do you think EA should focus more on strengthening existing strategies for improving the world compared to broadening into new ones?" "How much do you think EA movement building should focus on increasing the commitment and coordination of current EAs as opposed to recruitment and outreach?" and perhaps "In recruiting and reaching out, who should be the primary target?" (example answers: people that are most likely to identify with EA, people with the most to offer in terms of time and resources, people from different walks of life that can reveal EA's blindspots)

A test question to see how much you have to correct for people’s unwillingness to let you lose comment karma, right? ;‑)

Doesn't seem to personal for me (and, generally speaking, a good idea)