Once they get above about 3 pounds, I just can't use 'em anymore. Fortunately I have a slow-growing model.
Posted on 12/08/2007 7:55:23 PM PST by daylilly
Thoughts on Growing Cell Phone Use, Polls, and Election Integrity
Will the growth in households with no landlines and only a cell phone begin to skew poll results in the near future? Some pollsters are concerned:
With more American households giving up their old-fashioned land lines and using cellphones for all calls, public opinion researchers are facing a challenge of how to make sure they are getting representative samples when conducting polls.
Since the 1970s, pollsters have relied on sampling techniques that depend on talking with people on their home land line telephones. For the most part, the polls sample the public by randomly dialing telephone numbers in every region from a list of area codes and exchanges known to be residences. The sample is weighted to the results of the latest census.
But cellphones are not geographically based, forcing pollsters to adjust their methods. In addition, a land line often represents a household and a cellphone often represents an individual.
Pollsters say they are also concerned about low response rates among people reached on cellphones. Because wireless carriers charge customers by the minute, people may be less likely to agree to complete lengthy cellphone surveys.
The survey industry is exploring reimbursing respondents for minutes used.
Who are these adults with cellphones only?
According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Health Interview Survey, adults with cellphones and no land lines are more likely to be young — half of exclusively wireless users are younger than 30 — male, Hispanic, living in poverty, renting a residence and living in metropolitan regions.
The Pew Research Center conducted four studies last year on the differences between cellphone and land line respondents. The studies said the differences were not significant enough to influence surveys properly weighted to census data. With the increase in cellphone-only households, that may not be the case next year. Researchers, including the New York Times/CBS News poll will test that by incorporating cellphones in samples.
“If the percentage of adults living in cell-only households continues to grow at the rate it has been growing for the past four years, I have projected that it will exceed 25 percent by the end of 2008,” Stephen J. Blumberg, a senior scientist at the National Center for Health Statistics, wrote in an e-mail message.
More here about the cell phone challenge as it applies to survey research.
The difficulties in cell phone polling will only add to the challenges pollsters face. It will also present plenty of opportunities for error and abuse in determining sampling methods and weighting criteria. The bottom line is that, during this transition period, telephone polls will be even more error-prone than ever.
The only poll that counts is the poll on election day -- which is why avoiding election fraud of all kinds is of critical importance. The fact that polling results may be even more error-prone than usual means that election fraud may also be more difficult to detect.
Handing out driver's licenses to non-citizens, failing to require photo identification from voters (or prohibiting such requests for proof of identity), allowing liberal use of absentee ballots, and using unreliable vote counting systems without verifiable paper trails all create prime opportunities for abuse.
We need extreme vigilance to maintain the integrity of our elections. If that integrity is undermined, there is precious little left of our democracy.
Every election that happens, this problem will get worse if the author is correct about the lack of landlines and increasing cell phone useage. Will the pollsters be able to adapt, and if you try other methods of polling there might be new ways to abuse them.
I'm not an expert on polling, so I hope others will contribute their thoughts on this.
Once they get above about 3 pounds, I just can't use 'em anymore. Fortunately I have a slow-growing model.
One way is to use a preselected panel to select interviewees from — rather than just randomly dialing the population at large. A panel comprises a large number of preselected volunteers, who agree to be surveyed on occasion (often in exchange for money or prizes). Since the location and demographics of a panel are known in advance, it’s not difficult to chose a “representative” sample for each poll. The panel would include a proportionate number of cell-phone users.
Another advantage of panels is that response rate is usually far better than it is for random dialing to the population at large. Response-rate bias is one of the most serious sources of error in polls & is not easy to quantify. Panels have a big edge in reducing response rate bias.
I don’t answer any calls that show up on my caller ID as blocked or unavailable and I almost never get incoming calls on my cell.
Funny, really funny. Where did you get that picture?
Time to eat crow. I told you in that one thread that these polls are worthless.
That’s a wise thing to do. But if it was a poll, you could have had a very positive impact.
I wouldn’t answer polling questions on a cell phone call, and I don’t answer the call if I don’t recognize the number. So who does that leave for them to poll?
OK, it was "giant cell phone."
Another technique solicits responses to a series of questions on the net. The secondary questions are analyzed to identify groups, then the data is recast according to other statistical evidence concerning the makeup of the group.
Neither technique relies on landline "only" folks.
So far I haven't seen any results for this approach but would imagine the first guy to figure it out is going to make hundreds of millions of dollars.
Excellent effort though. Bonus points awarded for persistence. Unfortunately, those bonus points are not redeemable for primary votes. But Paul supporters should be used to that, I figure. Which, by the latest calculations, leaves 95% of the country wondering what we're talking about.
I got a laugh out of the picture anyway.
I quit using google even though I used to get good results with many searches. Something about they might be a front for the KGB thing...:) Is it worth it? I thought no.
Bottom line: These polls are junk, promoted by the establishment.
The only poll I care about will be taken on November 4, 2008 (11/5/2008 if you are from DU).
Does the name “Thomas Dewey” ring a bell?
Yes it does, Truman/Dewey 1948 I think. I like to read biographies on Truman as his life was such an interesting time period.
Elections often surprise and are often interesting.
I don’t live by the polls but you have to wonder how accurate they are, it seems to be such a guessing game. And a number of people base their posts on poll information. Some polling information concerns me.
I read about a wide range of information and on a lot of different subjects.
So “ (11/5/2008 if you are from DU).” Is this a general statement or for some particular purpose?
I remember something like that happened on a prior election, maybe 2004, and it went around as something of a joke.
You are correct that the only poll that counts is election day.
A joke is lame if you have to explain it, but here goes:
National elections are held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. I’m too lazy to look at a calendar, but I believe that 11/05/2008 is the first Wednesday after the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
And DU are the New York Yankees. We are the Boston Red Sox.
Good night.
Only to those who give a crap about what a poll says.
Or those who change their stance on a subject to fit a poll, whether they believe the new stance or not.
Which group do you fit into, that makes you believe it is a 'serious issue'?
Or are you just responding to a poll?
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.