Poll Methodology-A 2004 Guide (a must read for those interested in polling, Zogby, various firms)

Polipundit ^ | 9/24/04 | DJ Drummond

[Cableguy]

There has been intense interest in the polls this year, and the recent disagreement about the range of position has only highlighted discussion. Some people like to support a poll with results they like, without any sort of examination about why that poll is different from others. And some reject polls on a charge of outright bias or prejudice, which I can understand, given the partisan comments from supposedly objective people like John Zogby and Larry Sabato, but I must caution the readers to be careful to consider the evidence before accepting or rejecting a poll.

[middle section analyzes various polls/polling firms]

All in all, Zogby’s habit of confusing his personal opinion with data-driven conclusions, his admitted practice of manipulating the respondent pool and his demographic weights, by standards not accepted anywhere else, along with mixing Internet polls with telephone interview results, forces me to reject his polls as unacceptable; they simply cannot be verified, and I strongly warn the reader that there is no established benchmark for the Zogby reports, even using previous Zogby polls, because he has changed his practices from his own history.

Except for some specific polls whose practices earned remarks for their excellence or a distinct lack of it, I have tried not to rank or grade the polls. I would also recommend the reader read through the polls himself, to determine which is most thorough in its work and results. But hopefully, this guide will help sort through who is chasing the money, and who is serious about their work.

[Cableguy]

ping

[EdReform]

bttt for later

[LS]

Just finished this: it is fantastic, and shows why you CANNOT trust Zogby or Harris Interactive, or, unfortunately, IBD, and why Gallup is still the "gold standard."

[jbwbubba]

I think making any polls public before an election should be illegal.

[Papatex]

When Zogby polled me and asked for what I though would be the major issues in this Presidential Campaign, among the options given me were the "War on Terrorism" and the "War in Iraq".

This told me of his basic bias.

They are the same.

I've discounted his polls ever since.

[DarthVader]

Zobgy sux!! He trashes Rasmussen. Gallup is the gold standard.

[G.Mason]

Terrific!

A definite keeper. (Even for a guy who despises polls)

[kesg]

Awesome, dude!

[dvwjr]

Thanks!

Very good info...


dvwjr

[eureka!]

FYI ping...

[BlackRazor]

Just finished this: it is fantastic, and shows why you CANNOT trust Zogby or Harris Interactive, or, unfortunately, IBD, and why Gallup is still the "gold standard."

I do think he was overly harsh on Harris (the telephone poll), and I posted so on his site. Just because a company doesn't release all their methodology isn't good enough reason to ignore them, as he advises us to do. Harris' track record is very good, and based on their results they are not a firm I would choose to ignore.

[kitkat]

BUMP

[LS]

Um, no. They changed to an interactive methodology this year. Totally unreliable.

[BlackRazor]

They changed to an interactive methodology this year. Totally unreliable.

Not quite true. They do both phone and interactive polling. They started doing interactive polling in 2000 - I agree that I wouldn't put much weight on that. But I still have no reason to question their telephone polling.

[jern]

bump or later

[ConservativeMan55]

Interesting...