Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday June 22 2015, @08:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the little-more-than-guesswork dept.

Cliff Zukin writes in the NY Times that those paying close attention to the 2016 election should exercise caution as they read the polls because election polling is in near crisis as statisticians say polls are becoming less reliable. According to Zukin, two trends are driving the increasing unreliability of election and other polling in the United States: the growth of cellphones and the decline in people willing to answer surveys. Coupled, they have made high-quality research much more expensive to do, so there is less of it. This has opened the door for less scientifically based, less well-tested techniques. To top it off, a perennial election polling problem, how to identify “likely voters,” has become even thornier. Today, a majority of people are difficult or impossible to reach on landline phones. One problem is that the 1991 Telephone Consumer Protection Act has been interpreted by the Federal Communications Commission to prohibit the calling of cellphones through automatic dialers, in which calls are passed to live interviewers only after a person picks up the phone. To complete a 1,000-person survey, it’s not unusual to have to dial more than 20,000 random numbers, most of which do not go to actual working telephone numbers.

The second unsettling trend are rapidly declining response rates, reaching levels once considered unimaginable. In the late 1970s, pollsters considered an 80 percent response rate acceptable but by 2014 the response rate has fallen to 8 percent. "Our old paradigm has broken down, and we haven’t figured out how to replace it," concludes Zukin. "In short, polls and pollsters are going to be less reliable. We may not even know when we’re off base. What this means for 2016 is anybody’s guess."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 23 2015, @08:17PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 23 2015, @08:17PM (#200075)

    Getting rather tiring, but nope on the nope. "And" is a logical conjunction, which means that both claims are asserted to be true.

    It's describing a specific scenario. Learn the way humans actually use English rather than acting like a robot.

    Why are polls a waste of time? What are they for? Why do some people pay so much money to have them done, and who are these people? Evidently polls are reliable enough for them! So are we going with Karl Rove's "real math", or Nixon's "Silent Majority"? Everyone knows that every agrees with me, so we can ignore polls. Yeah, that's the ticket!

    You're ranting about random nonsense.

    Why exactly are polls not a waste of time? Is there some pressing need to know what the election results will likely be before the election that doesn't involve just manipulating voters into voting a certain way? Probably not, or at least not for me. If you want to pay attention to stupid popularity polls, have at it.