1 / 29

Polls and polling

Polls and polling. 30 October 2013. Polls and 2013 Elections. So who won?. Was it predictable?. In US and elsewhere, economy plus war a good predictor of results Could we have predicted Czech results in August? What was expected:

spence
Download Presentation

Polls and polling

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Polls and polling 30 October 2013

  2. Polls and 2013 Elections

  3. So who won?

  4. Was it predictable? • In US and elsewhere, economy plus war a good predictor of results • Could we have predicted Czech results in August? • What was expected: • Incumbent parties, especially ODS, will do worse due to scandals/economy • Opposition should do better, but is CSSD the opposition when Rusnok is PM? • What was unexpected: • Should new parties have done so well? • Should presidents have so little influence

  5. Economy and the vote - US

  6. Journalists’ model of elections • Voters are influenced by day-to-day events of campaign • Mistakes (gaffes) by candidates and parties matter • Voters have short memories – rely on most recent events • Candidates can fool voters by changing policy positions • People vote for character traits, not policies or issues • Who would you want to have a beer with?

  7. Does the campaign explain Czech results? • Did CSSD run the best campaign, but fade at the end? • Were campaigns of ANO and KSCM also strong? • Did ODS (and TOP 09) run bad campaigns? What should they have changed? • Could Zeleni, SPOZ, Hlavavzhuru done better? • Did sympathy with leaders matter?

  8. Gelman and King on variability of polls • Voters vote based on enlightened preferences • At start of campaign voters don’t have necessary information • Positions of parties on major issues and competence • Campaign provides voters with necessary information • By time of election, voters vote “correctly” • But why do polls start in a different place?

  9. Did Czech voters become enlightened?Were polls accurate?

  10. New trends • Aggregating large numbers of polls • Don’t pay attention to individual poll results • Newspapers have incentive to exaggerate • Hard to tell if which poll is an outlier • Other technologies: Twitter, Google searches • New paper by Rojas: Tweets predict results • Conduct your own survey/experiment: Mechanical Turk • https://www.mturk.com/mturk/

  11. Your experiences with exit polls • How difficult to ask people? • Who answered and who didn’t? • What sort of reasons did they give? • How do you explain results?

  12. What are polls measuring?

  13. Why polls are good • Strong biases due to friends, colleagues, neighborhood, media • 1998: “I don’t know anyone who approves of Clinton” • 2006: “I don’t know anyone who approves of Bush” • Very hard to make accurate estimates • Old method of public opinion: size and enthusiasm of crowds • We tend to think we know more than we do

  14. Difficulty of estimating

  15. Answers

  16. Does will of the people exist? • Who is the people? • Did the Czech people reject politics as usual? • More than 60% of seats in parliament go to parties from last parliament (>70% if count KDU-CSL) • Most people are not very ideological • Most people do not have strong political opinions • Most people take cues from parties and political leaders • Adopt positions favored by preferred parties/politicians

  17. Will of people depends on institutions • How would will be different under majoritarian electoral rules? • Arrow’s impossibility theorem: no means of aggregation can satisfy simple set of conditions • Transitivity: A>B and B>C means A>C • Irrelevant alternatives don’t matter (cf., ice skating) • Consider these preferences • 30%: CSSD>ANO>KSCM • 30%: ANO>KSCM>CSSD • 30%: KSCM>CSSD>ANO • ANO versus CSSD: CSSD wins 2 to 1 • CSSD versus KSCM: KSCM wins 2 to 1 • KSCM versus ANO: ANO wins 2 to 1

  18. Theory of survey response - Zaller • People don’t have “true preferences” which they reveal to pollster • “Most of what gets measured as public opinion does not exist except in the presence of a pollster” • RAS model • Receive information from elites (depends on political awareness) • Accept (or reject) this information (depends on whether it conforms with prior beliefs) • Sample considerations available in head at time of survey • Less aware voters: receive less information, but accept more – opinions vary • More aware voters: receive more information, but filter it better

  19. Monica Lewinsky’s contribution to political science • Clinton’s approval ratings go up after scandal • How is this possible? • People usually don’t think about president • Scandal causes them to think more about his accomplishments • They distinguish his personal life from politics • They realize that he does a good job as president • A revised view • Media and elites not so powerful • People influenced by fundamentals (eg, economy)

  20. Problems with polls • Question wording effects • Double-barreled questions: Do you approve or disapprove of the way the government is handling the country’s foreign and domestic affairs? • Leading phrases: The government supports introducing tuition for university students. What do you think? • Question order effects • Surveys typically begin with attitudes (non-threatening and interesting – eg, what is most important problem in the country) • Then intentions (who will you vote for) and past behaviors (who did you vote for) • Demographics (few will want to answer at the start) • Rising percentage of non-respondents • Social desirability bias: desire to please interviewer • Controversial questions on gender and race • Bradley effect: black candidates do worse in elections than polls

  21. But a large amount of stability in CZ public opinion – is Czech public rational?

  22. Who is left out of polls?

  23. What do the super-rich believe? • Very hard to contact – they don’t have listed numbers or answer the phone, many layers of protection • Colleagues in US contacting those with average income > $1 million • Findings • Very interested and active in politics • Frequent contact with elected politicians and government officials • Conservative economic beliefs • Worried about budget, more willing to cut social programs, maintain low taxes, reduce regulation • How much more influential on politics?

  24. What about the poor? • Exclusion bias: Are people who don’t answer or answer “don’t know” different than others? • Poor subject to value conflicts on issues of redistribution: freedom and individualism versus fairness and equality • Poor have fewer resources and time to gather and process information to resolve conflict • More likely to answer “Don’t know” to questions on welfare state • Are we underestimating support for welfare state?

  25. One of my projects • Database of policy preferences from public opinion polls • Disaggregate by income, education, and gender • Whose opinions are most likely to become policy?

  26. Gender differences small

  27. Differences not surprising • Men favor • Allow drinkers to drive • Allow nuclear weapons on territory • Allow Mein Kampf to be published • Finish Temelin reactor • Women favor • No export of weapons • Reduce speed limit in villages • Stricter gun laws • Forbid tobacco ads

  28. A thesis project inspired by elections • How do new parties differ from old? • Programs • Length, coverage, promises • Parliament • Party discipline, attendance, speeches, proposals, amendments • Government • Laws proposed by ministers, # passed/rejected

More Related