Posted on 12/22/2007 3:52:38 PM PST by Yaelle
Survey Methodology [Zogby America Likely Voters] 12/12/07 thru 12/14/07
This is a telephone survey of [likely voters] conducted by Zogby International.
The target sample is [1000 likely voter] interviews with approximately [96] questions asked. Samples are randomly drawn from telephone cd’s of national listed sample. Zogby International surveys employ sampling strategies in which selection probabilities are proportional to population size within area codes and exchanges. Up to six calls are made to reach a sampled phone number. Cooperation rates are calculated using one of AAPOR’s approved methodologies[1] and are comparable to other professional public-opinion surveys conducted using similar sampling strategies.[2] Weighting by [region, party, age, race, religion, gender] is used to adjust for non-response. The margin of error is +/- 3.2 percentage points. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups.
The target sample is [436 Democratic Likely Primary Voter] interviews with approximately [96] questions asked. Samples are randomly drawn from telephone cd’s of national listed sample. Zogby International surveys employ sampling strategies in which selection probabilities are proportional to population size within area codes and exchanges. Up to six calls are made to reach a sampled phone number. Cooperation rates are calculated using one of AAPOR’s approved methodologies and are comparable to other professional public-opinion surveys conducted using similar sampling strategies. Weighting by [party, age, race, religion, gender] is used to adjust for non-response. The margin of error is +/- 4.8 percentage points. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups.
The target sample is [432Republican Likely Primary Voter] interviews with approximately [96] questions asked. Samples are randomly drawn from telephone cd’s of national listed sample. Zogby International surveys employ sampling strategies in which selection probabilities are proportional to population size within area codes and exchanges. Up to six calls are made to reach a sampled phone number. Cooperation rates are calculated using one of AAPOR’s approved methodologies and are comparable to other professional public-opinion surveys conducted using similar sampling strategies. Weighting by [region, party, age, race, religion, gender] is used to adjust for non-response. The margin of error is +/- 4.8 percentage points. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups.
[1] See COOP4 (p.38) in Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates of Surveys. The American Association for Public Opinion Research, (2000).
[2] Cooperation Tracking Study: April 2003 Update, Jane M. Sheppard and Shelly Haas. The Council for Marketing & Opinion Research (CMOR). Cincinnati, Ohio (2003).
(12/19/2007)
Thanks for this little reminder of Zogby's/pollsters' infallibility!
You have it backwards. An election that does not match a predetermined poll result is a rigged election. An electorate that goes against a poll result is too stupid to see that they have been deceived.
The only thing that can be “gained” by one is to influence a vote!!!
Who needs to know how I’m gonna vote??...read everyones vote in the paper the day after the election...
Remember that Zogby is a Muslim activist and anti-American. His polling is always suspect.
I don't think there's any evidence to show that that's true at all.
Zogby (the pollster, not the brother) is a Democrat but he's nonetheless a good pollster.
A lot of people don't answer the phone anymore, but a good random sample will take that into account, set a target for the number of respondents it needs to establish statistical probability and the pollster will just keep dialing until that number is reached.
The big problem nowadays is that so many people no longer have land-lines. Younger people are excluded in larger percentages but increasing numbers of older potential respondents are also not included. Nonetheless, the polls are still statistically valid (IMO) for the most part.
You have to pay attention to how the questions are phrased and keep in mind that they represent only the proverbial "snapshot" in time. Take them only for what they're worth, especially at this point. The match-ups between Hillary and, say, McCain are essentially worthless except for entertainment value.
But with each day that passes, the Iowa polls become more valuable as an indicator of how Iowans are thinking.
I am one of the folks Zogby polls in their online polls. They seem to accept my answers for the most part, but several times I have been in the midst of a poll and the answer I gave was NOT what they were wanting or expecting. I get shuffled aside into a generic questionnaire, and then I don’t get any polls for 3 weeks.
Zogby is biased, they just hide it well.
“Math ExpertsPlease explain..”
zombie is a democrat. ‘nough said?
Zogby (the pollster, not the brother) is a Democrat but he's nonetheless a good pollster.
James Zogby is Founder and President of the Arab American Institute and Senior Political Consultant to Zogby International.
In April of 2002, over 5 years ago, Christian Science Monitor hosted a breakfast with John Zogby (the pollster) and James Zogby (president of the Arab American Institute). The Zogbys described the Zogby poll as being run by BOTH of them, not just by the pollster. Many appearances on TV to discuss Zogby Polls involves both of them. The formula is John talks about the poll itself then laterals to Jim who attacks the anti-Arab U.S. foreign policy.
The Zogby Poll brothers are joined at the hip and the pro-Arab bias is real.
In theory, if you can select a truly random and representative sample of the voting public, then a poll can provide a very powerful tool to measure the probable voting results, even from a relatively small sample.
You can see how that would be attractive to a candidate -- both as a way of shaping his message, and of deciding whether his millions of dollars of campaign money are a waste of time. And of course it's attractive to media organizations, and to us, because it's fun to see "who's winning."
The problem is that it's becoming more difficult to actually collect a truly random, representative sample, because of cell phones (which they can't or don't call), no-call lists, caller ID, and plain old "I don't want to talk to a pollster" attitudes, and so on.
Plus which, they want to capture the whole country in a few hundred calls, so the odds of sampling bias are high: Zogby has has famous "special sauce" for adjusting his results to account for the "real" proportions of Republicans, Democrats, etc, as opposed to the proportion in his sample.
On the largest scale, I think polls are still reasonably accurate for distinguishing between primary candidates -- you only poll likely primary voters, and so the uncertainty of independent voters tends to go away. But then, you'd pretty much know that without polling: Tom Tancredo shouldn't have needed a poll to know that he was never going to get out of low single-digits.
Fred Thompson is an interesting case: I think he's "outside" the polling right now -- polls are not reaching the voters who are likely to vote for him in the early primaries. He may be artificially low. We'll see if I'm right about that ... it's just the sense I get from watching how folks respond to him.
He is?
According to this page he is the son of Lebanese Catholic parents. There is no mention of a conversion to Islam.
I know I am arguing from silence but you'd think there'd be a mention in the article if he went from being a Catholic to being a Muslim.
Arab != Muslim.
The problem is that it's becoming more difficult to actually collect a truly random, representative sample, because of cell phones (which they can't or don't call), no-call lists, caller ID, and plain old "I don't want to talk to a pollster" attitudes, and so on.
I can't think of a way to TRULY collect a random, representative sample. I do know that the faster the call would be would help. For instance, if the pollster got someone and was quickly able to say that they are doing an independent poll for the presidential election (something a FReeper would never believe, anyway) and the call would last a total of 2 minutes, you might get a larger sample. Also if they were allowed to call cell phones. The pollster would list the candidates in the pollee's party, and ask them to pick. Maybe get some demographics really fast. Boom, the pollee's life would not be too disturbed.
Otherwise they really are only sampling people without caller ID who have nothing better to do.
Fascinating to me that you think Thompson voters are outside the polling population currently. I asked this whole thread because I was getting that impression but wasn't quite sure. It's just too hard to know.
Whoa. Interesting.
Now I wonder about the other pollsters. I don't wonder too much about CNN, though...
It would be easier to say “mix one cup mayonnaise in a bowl with half a cup of dill relish (drained), a tablespoon of worcestershire sauce, three tablespoons of lemon juice with pulp, and half a teaspoon of rosemary. Whip thoroughly and chill for two hours. Use within three days.”
1.) cell phones may be excluding the youth vote, but that demographic often has the lowest voting record (by age). Therefore, any adjustments by age are going to maximize the elderly vote, which is historically overrepresented, and minimize the votes of the poor or the young, who typically vote in much lower numbers.
2.) At least Zogby is using a 1,000 person sample, which is generally considered the optimum number of respondents in a survey. However, since Zogby is breaking it into 2 groups (Republicans and Democrats), and then by demographic (ethnicity, socioeconomic factors, voting record, geography, etc.), the 1,000 count increasingly becomes meaningless. It's better to look at both whether the poll by demographic is statistically relevant and the margin of error, because organizations may choose to publish results which has no meaning whatsoever, but simply look good.
Push Polls v. Neutral Polls
Not only have I worked on several campaigns, but I also visited inside a polling business. Several things:
A.) Polling companies typically need to affiliate with a particular party in order for local representatives and companies to trust that their information will be kept confidential. It's common sense-- if you're a rabid Republican, why would I let you conduct the in-depth survey or poll in Maryland about Kerry's popularity? Quality polling businesses hire interviewers who have little political exposure and no accent, so that they have little or no opinion about the results and people can actually understand them.
B.) If your questionmaire terminates or turns generic, it is likely that you indicated that you are in a demographic for which they already have sufficient respondents. In order to avoid overrepresenting say, pro-life Republicans, in a poll, they will either end or divert the questionnaire in order to maintain their original demographic requirements.
C.) Each candidate will broadcast the results of whichever poll makes them look best, and, conversely, selectively underplay the sections of a poll which makes him/her look bad. The same thing goes with the news. Therefore, if a candidate is being touted as doing extremely well in the news, it could be the channel's fault more than the polling organization.
Zogby & Rasmussen vs. The Rest
What really gets me is when news stations such as ABC arrogantly broadcast a "new poll" which they themselves designed--- often with less than 500 respondents, non-random, using the snowball method. Then they tout this great new poll as "America Speaking" when it really means nothing. Be thankful that polls such as Zogby & Rasmussen--which at least attempt for neutrality--exist. Who'd prefer a CNN poll every night?
Good points and it makes sense. The only polls I have ever taken part in were for local candidates and were very obvious push-polling, asking stupid questions that did not allow my “real” opinions. I was forced to choose between “being stabbed or shot to death,” if you know what I mean. BS like “If you had to choose which issue was the most important to you, would you choose global warming or helping the homeless?”
I’d like to hope that the Big ‘Uns like Zogby and Rasmussen actually stay very neutral in their polling even though many have said they do have their biases. The demographic representation thing still spooks me a little.
But as another poster already said, it’s fun to have colorful charts and numbers to work with. And if we KNEW that the results were significant, at least we’d get some knowledge that Candidate A “moved up two points” from the previous poll, etc.
You forgot to add “Place over television talking head pollster’s head, then cover with a garbage can” (a la Carville).
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.