
A new poll has hit the phone lines of Virginia. Run by a group calling itself "Survey 2006," it will show up on caller ID as "S2006 703-961-9120." Survey 2006's polls have been criticized as openly biased, badly written, and even push-polls. This one is no exception.
The computerized voice announces itself as "Survey 2006," though at the end of the poll is notifies the participant that the poll was conducted by "The Family Foundation of Virginia." As lengthy pauses by the participant are detected by the system and may prompt a disconnection, a verbatim copy of the survey will take the collaborative work of several individuals. What follows is a fairly accurate representation of the poll, though some minor differences in phrasing and language exist.
While these questions are paraphrased, specific linguistic constructions like "Death Tax" and "Unborn Fetuses" have been preserved to maintain the general tone and framing of the survey. An analysis of the language used and the subtext of questions reveals a series of problems with this poll. Such an analysis follows:
It's just another poll is the vast field of American politics, a snapshot of the political terrain. Like all photos, however, it fixes the world as seen through the photographer's eye.
That's really interesting, KF. It looks from some of the questions rather as if a straw man (abortion in 2nd and 3rd trimester and stem cell research) is being got up in preparation for the elections.
If question 3 is posed as "Do you agree that marriage should be..." then that is more than just a little bias injected into the question. People are always a little more likely to "agree" than to "disagree." Also, I think "legally" is a bit buried in the question.
Some people would also be right to criticize "Do you attend church, temple, or synagogue..." which requires the responder to answer within a specific Judeo-Christian framework. A better question would be "Do you attend formal religious practice at a church, temple, synagogue, or other place of worship..." It should also probably include mosque. That isn't to say that the question will bias the results. Instead, it biases the analysis of the results, or, as you say, will be used to "establish trends against other questions" in a very particular way.
On the other hand, I disagree that question 5 has much bias, though I do think it is so vague as to be useless. It should be followed by more questions that probe support for specific ideas and policies, but if it were, then it would be a legitimate question.
The decision to use the phrase "pro-life" to the exclusion of "pro-choice" represents a frame of the abortion issue. "Pro-Life" implicates its opposition as "Pro-Death" or "Anti-Life" rather than the more typical "Pro-Choice."
I hope this wouldn't be seen as self-promotion (although, it really is), but this has a lot to do with my most recent article.
Good article,
As you point out, it is not hard to create a biased poll, and this one is pretty biased.
Another "hidden" bias, is the trying to get a truly random sample to respond.
For example, make the first question clearly supporting abortion and a passionate anti abortionsit is far more likely not to hang up than a pro-abortionist --- or someone that doesn't care that passionately. .
Thanks for breaking the poll down issue by issue. Polls are always misleading these days. The + or - 4% is a joke.
I am in California, working in the political direct mail field. Most of the pieces we do nowadays are "hit" pieces, meant to drop right before the election and show the opposing candidate in a negative light. Politics can be an ugly business.
The + or - 4% is a joke.
The ±4% (or 3%, common in poll samples of 1,000) is mathematics. If the poll isn't conducted properly, then the results are meaningless. However, the statistics behind the poll error is sound as any introduction to statistics course will prove. Please no one quote Mark Twain to me, either. He was a brilliant mind, but his taking issue with statistics was in how they were used, not developed (which speaks to rstrb8r's comment).
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |