Posted on 01/19/2005 7:12:27 PM PST by RWR8189
Evaluation of Edison/Mitofsky Election System 2004 prepared by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for the National Election Pool (NEP) Executive Summary
On November 2, 2004, the Election System created by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for the National Election Pool (NEP) produced election estimates and exit poll data for analysis in 120 races in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. In addition, between January and March 2004, Edison and Mitofsky conducted exit polls for 23 Democratic Primaries and Caucuses. For every election, the system delivered on its main goals: there were no incorrect NEP winner projections, and the exit poll data produced on election day were used on-air and in print by the six members of the NEP (AP, ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX and NBC) as well as several dozen media organizations who subscribed to that data. However, the estimates produced by the exit poll data on November 2nd were not as accurate as we have produced with previous exit polls.
Our investigation of the differences between the exit poll estimates and the actual vote count point to one primary reason: in a number of precincts a higher than average Within Precinct Error most likely due to Kerry voters participating in the exit polls at a higher rate than Bush voters. There have been partisan overstatements in previous elections, more often overstating the Democrat, but occasionally overstating the Republican. While the size of the average exit poll error has varied, it was higher in 2004 than in previous years for which we have data. This report measures the errors in the exit poll estimates and attempts to identify the factors that contributed to these errors.
The body of this report contains the details of our analysis of the performance of the exit polls and the election system. In addition to the information included in this report, exit poll data from this election is being archived at the Roper Center at the University of Connecticut and at the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan and is available there for review and further analysis. This is the procedure that we have followed for all previous exit polls, which are also available at the Roper Center and ISR. The description of the methodology of the exit polls has already been posted on our Web site – www.exit-poll.net - along with all questionnaires used on election day and the completion rates nationally and by state. Here is a brief summary of our findings:
1. Exit Poll Estimates
The exit poll estimates in the 2004 general election overstated John Kerry’s share of the vote nationally and in many states. There were 26 states in which the estimates produced by the exit poll data overstated the vote for John Kerry by more than one standard error, and there were four states in which the exit poll estimates overstated the vote for George W. Bush by more than one standard error. The inaccuracies in the exit poll estimates were not due to the sample selection of the polling locations at which the exit polls were conducted. We have not discovered any systematic problem in how the exit poll data were collected and processed. Exit polls do not support the allegations of fraud due to rigging of voting equipment. Our analysis of the difference between the vote count and the exit poll at each polling location in our sample has found no systematic differences for precincts using touch screen and optical scan voting equipment.
We say this because these differences are similar to the differences for punch card voting equipment, and less than the difference for mechanical voting equipment. Our detailed analysis by polling location and by interviewer has identified several factors that may have contributed to the size of the Within Precinct Error that led to the inaccuracies in the exit poll estimates. Some of these factors are within our control while others are not.
It is difficult to pinpoint precisely the reasons that, in general, Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polls than Bush voters. There were certainly motivational factors that are impossible to quantify, but which led to Kerry voters being less likely than Bush voters to refuse to take the survey. In addition there are interactions between respondents and interviewers that can contribute to differential non-response rates. We can identify some factors that appear to have contributed, even in a small way, to the discrepancy. These include:
• Distance restrictions imposed upon our interviewers by election officials at the state and local level • Weather conditions which lowered completion rates at certain polling locations
• Multiple precincts voting at the same location as the precinct in our sample
• Polling locations with a large number of total voters where a smaller portion of voters was selected to be asked to fill out questionnaires
• Interviewer characteristics such as age, which were more often related to precinct error this year than in past elections
We plan further analysis on the following factors:
• Interviewer training and election day procedures
• Interviewing rate calculations
• Interviewer characteristics • Precinct characteristics
• Questionnaire length and design
We also suggest the following changes for future exit polls:
• Working to improve cooperation with state and local election officials
Click here to see the rest of the report
You know, Edison actually did invent a voting machine.
http://edison.rutgers.edu/patents/00090646.PDF
This man was a one man history lesson.
Maybe I will...
Not Gallup, but pretty much everything you would want to know about this year's exit polls.
Thanks!
The report's insistance that the primary cause of statistical bias is that Kerry voters were more willing to participate than Bush voters is not supported by the data. For example, on page 37 there is a chart that shows that the completion and refusal rates were constant in extremely partisan precincts on both sides and in relatively competitive precincts. Further, they found that in rural areas and small towns, the cooperation rate was higher than in urban areas.
Not really. They produced an entire broadcast to suit DU lunacy. They took it somewhat seriously, at the end, and never once mentioned Rossi and WA governor's race, which really was stolen by the Dems stuffing the ballot box.
They would never run a show based on complaints from those posting here to FR. Remember, Koppel is still trying to convince the world he's a 'press-pass carrying journalist', after the stunt he tried to pull with John O'Neill just before the election.
You lost. Get over it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.