Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Nate Silver: "Excluding Cellphones Introduces Statistically Significant Bias in Polls"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 08:21 AM
Original message
Nate Silver: "Excluding Cellphones Introduces Statistically Significant Bias in Polls"
... and how this problem affects not only the President's poll numbers, but how we view the prospects for the 2010 mid-term elections.

Excluding Cellphones Introduces Statistically Significant Bias in Polls

This is a graph, per the CDC, of the percentage of "cellphone-only" adults in the United States. The fraction, as of the second half of 2009, was 23 percent of all U.S. adults, or 25 percent of all U.S. households. These adults -- about a quarter of the population -- are simply ignored by many pollsters.



This is not a new problem -- in fact, it's one we've written about on several occasions. But it's continuing to get worse. The percentage of people who have replaced their landlines with cellphones has climbed at a remarkably steady rate. (There may have been an especially large leap from the second half of 2008 to the first half of 2009, when the recession was at its worst and many people were looking for ways to trim household costs.)

Bear in mind that these figures are already somewhat out of date. The fraction could be in the high 20s by the time we get to November. And if the current trends hold, it could be in the mid or high 30s by the time we get to 2012. Nor does the figure include so-called "cellphone-mostly" households, which is when the house has a landline, but rarely or never uses it to receive incoming calls; another 15 percent of the population falls into this category.

Cellphone-only households are different from their landline-using counterparts. They tend to be younger, poorer, more urban, less white, and more Internet-savvy. All of these characteristics are correlated with political viewpoints and voting behavior.

The pollsters' usual defense mechanism against this is to weight their polls by demogrpahics -- something which they need to do anyway, since polls are subject to many forms of non-response bias (for instance, it's harder to get men on the phone then women). But this is potentilly an inadequate response for several reasons. First, some characteristics that correlate with both cellphone usage and political preferences may not correspond to those that are most commonly used to weight polls. It is somewhat rare, for instance, for pollsters to weight their polls by characteristics like urban/rural location or marital status, which are predictive of both cellphone usage and political beliefs. Being cellphone-dependent also appears to be significantly correlated with media consumption habits (in particular, getting more of one's news from the Internet and less from television), which also seems to be increasingly important in determining one's political views. And there are some characteristics that may be even more subtle. For instance, there are some hints in the CDC data (such as the higher prevalance of binge drinking) that cellphone-only adults are less "domestic" and more "bohemian". I suspect that, in young adults, this is correlated with more liberal political views.

Secondly, even where weighting occurs, one may encounter problems when upweighting from very small subsamples. It is now very difficult, for instance, to get young people on the phone when using a landline-only sample. About half of all adults from age 25-29, for instance, are cellphone-only, and two-thirds are either cellphone-only or cellphone-mostly. (The numbers are actually slightly better for adults aged 18-24, who are more likely to be living in a college dormatory, or still to be living at home, where a landline will usually be available.) Couple this with the fact that young people have grown up in a call-screening culture, and their response rates are often completely inadequate. Say that you're supposed to have 100 people aged 18-29 in a poll of 500 adults, but in fact you only get 30 because of problems with call-screening and cellphone usage. The margin of error on a sample of that size is 18 percent. And yet, you may essentially let each of these young people speak on behalf of two or three of their peers, to compensate for the ones you haven't gotten in contact with.

A new study from Pew, in fact, has found that these weighting schemes may have become inadequate. In their experiment, a weighted landline-only sample produced a generic ballot result of Republicans 47, Democrats 41, whereas a weighted landline-plus-cellphone sample had the generic ballot tied 44-44. That six-point net difference is statistically significant, and needless to say, could have huge implications for where the parties finish in November.

<snip>

The most obvious solution, of course, is to call cellphones, which more and more of the major-media pollsters (like Gallup, Pew, ABC/Post, CBS/NYT, NBC/WSJ and AP-Gfk) are doing, as are some academic polling centers like Quinnipiac.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/05/study-excluding-cellphones-introduces.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


And if I'm not mistaken, and some of you who follow the polls more closely than I do could confirm/deny this, the President typically does better in the polls listed than in the ones that aren't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
1. Yes, but good pollsters can control for that. Just as they control for the fact that, traditionally
older women are the ones that answer a phone.

You have to extrapolate the views of young male voters, for example.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yes, but that's the point...
.... being able to recognize a "good" poll from a "bad" one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. part of a larger problem
polling has always had troubles, and there are more "bad" ones than "good" ones. Self selection bias of any sort is a problem. Polling companies make or break themselves on their ability to adjust their data for the built in bias of the collection methods. The problem they are seeing here goes way beyond cell phones. The screening problem is an even larger problem. They now are experiencing problems in that people are using the instant communication technolgies (tweeting, IM, etc) to mention that they HAVE been polled, and what the questions were. As such, subsequent respondents have occasionally already been influenced on the very questions you'll be asking.

I suspect we are not long from a shift in the ways of collecting this information. Search engines and other related methods probably can already give them indications of peoples interests and opinions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #2
11. You find out on election day. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrToast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. The article addresses your point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Yes. It's a specific process. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #1
15. that makes no sense
not calling cell phones means you aren't even reaching a representative number of people who *only* talk on a cell phone and never answer nor use a landline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bette Noir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
4. Dewey Beats Truman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. A better example is the Literary Digest Poll
In 1936, Franklin Delano Roosevelt had been President for one term. The magazine, The Literary Digest, predicted that Alf Landon would beat FDR in that year's election by 57 to 43 percent. The Digest mailed over 10 million questionnaires to names drawn from lists of automobile and telephone owners, and over 2.3 million people responded - a huge sample.

...the Digest had predicted the winner in every election since 1916, and had based its predictions on the largest response to any poll in history. But Roosevelt won with 62% of the vote. The size of the Digest's error is staggering. How could they have been so far off?

The Literary Digest had made two fatal mistakes. Their list of names was biased in favor of those with enough money to buy cars and phones, a much smaller portion of the population in the thirties than it is today. And, more seriously, the Digest had depended on voluntary response. FDR was the incumbent, and those who were unhappy with his administration were more likely to respond to the Digest survey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dalaigh lllama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Just what I was thinking
If I recall correctly, the pollsters back then relied on people with phones, which left out a big chunk of the populace at the time. Seems like they're making the same mistake now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
5. The sky is blue and Red Square's in Moscow
Nice to see a new study on the point, though.

btw: there are quite a few sources of bias in these cheap media polls- some of which can be manipulated fairly predictable by the outfits that they hire. Despite that fact (which is well known to any grad student worth their salt in the sciences and social sciences, most Americans STILL take them as Gospel- and are thus rather easily manipulated by them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabbycat31 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
8. I did a blog post about this
and the younger (under 30) voters.

It also makes phonebanking an ineffective way of reaching younger voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. That's a constant. And is not usually a problem since they have very low voter turnout. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. It becomes a problem when they represent a significant enough percentage
that it potentially represents the margin of victory in key states or districts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. They're fairly predictable. They don't vote in local or off-year elections.
But, depending on the issue, you do have to get access to them.

A lot of polling firms, when they call a house, ask to "speak to the youngest male registered to vote at this address?" To get young men in.

Getting younger women on the phone is MUCH easier. But this problem is a constant that's been around in a long time. In 2004 only 17% of those under 30 eligible to vote did so. Sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. ...ask to "speak to the youngest male registered to vote at this address?"
Ouch.

There's so much wrong with that approach I wouldn't even know where to begin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabbycat31 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. here's my post on the subject
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
16. The biggest problems is that Polls are replacing to voice of voters......
How many polls have they taken on the Arizona law, and claim that "the People support the law" according to polls? See, that's the real problem to me; the lack of actually allowing the people to speak through the ballot box, and in the meantime media companies via poll results declaring what the people think. If polls are to replace voting; that's a huge problem we need to get a handle on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 09:49 PM
Response to Original message
18. Thank you for this important reminder.
We talked about it during the General Election too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 11th 2024, 03:50 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC