Grumpy about overly-simplistic polling

[andrewducker]

I do wish that polls wouldn't ask if people thought that the PM was handling something "Well" or "Badly". Because two people answering "Badly" might mean completely different things by it.

Also, me saying "Immigration is important to me" means the opposite of what a Reform voter would mean by it.

This because of reporting of how many people think that Starmer is handling the Iran situation well or badly. When I can guarantee that some of the "badly" think we should be bombing Iran right now, and some think that we shouldn't be involved even slightly.

Comments

[calimac]

I think of what I would say if asked if I agree that we should "Make America Great Again." Yes I do! And the very first step in making America great again is to get rid of Trump and all his minions.

Similarly but more consequently, I was actually polled on whether I thought George H.W. Bush was handling Gulf War I well or badly. I said I thought he was handling it very well. What disconcerted me was that the results, showing that most people said that, were sold as evidence he was a sure bet for re-election. Then when he lost the pollsters were baffled. This is because they hadn't asked me - or anyone else - the next question. "Are you planning on voting for him in 92"? No! "Why not?" Because I disagree with his economic policies.

[aldabra]

I can't tell whether I should even be answering these polls. If I say immigration is an important issue I get lumped in with Reform, and if I don't answer the polls I don't show up as opposition to Reform, so is my best bet saying immigration isn't important?

Welfare is one of these issues. Yes I think the cost of welfare is a top issue for the country, and we should address it through housing reform and higher taxes and universal income. The cost of energy is a top issue, which we should address by investing in renewables. Iran is a top issue, which we should address by defending it against unprovoked attack. None of these things is helped by answering a poll asking if they're top issues.

[starwatcher]

That's exactly my problem across the pond. Almost every question is so open-ended that a "Yes" or a "No" can be interpreted in two completely opposite directions. Each poll I take has a place for comments. I always point this out, and suggest we need the questions to be more specific. I've been making these comments for over 5 years. As far as I can tell, it hasn't made a bit of difference.

[aldabra]

I think it's deliberate on the part of the people commissioning the poll.

It took me a fair few years in consultancy research to realise how thoroughly the client's scoping limited what we could consider in the reports (and how easily we could be replaced as a contractor, or I could be replaced as an employee, if this was pointed out). The poll company's aim isn't to feed public opinion into policy-making; it is to give the client something they think it's worth paying for.

Reform wants to know, for their press releases, that they're focussing on the country's top issues. They do not want to publicise what the wider public thinks about those issues.

[starwatcher]

I think it's deliberate on the part of the people commissioning the poll.

I have long suspected that. Still, I get incredibly irritated when there's a question like --

I like using [this product] because [a] one positive comment, [b] another positive comment, [c] third positive comment, etc. *shaking my head* All I want is a place to check "I don't use this product."

(I'd rather say, "I wouldn't use this product on a bet," but I know they wouldn't allow that!)

[cellio]

That's either very sloppy or deliberately misleading, and since polls are usually commissioned by people with specific goals, I fear the latter is much more likely. :-(