A New Paradigm for Polling

Michael Bailey
{"title":"A New Paradigm for Polling","authors":"Michael Bailey","doi":"10.1162/99608f92.9898eede","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":". Scientific fields operate within paradigms that define problems and solutions for a community of researchers. The dominant paradigm in polling centers on random sampling, which is unfortunate because random sampling is, for all practical purposes, dead. The pollsters who try to produce random samples fail because hardly anyone responds. And more and more pollsters do not even try. The field therefore has folded weighting-type adjustments into the paradigm, but this too is unfortunate because weighting works only if we assume away important threats to sampling validity, threats that loom particularly large in the growing non-probability polling sector. This paper argues that the polling field needs to move to a more general paradigm built around the Meng (2018) equation that characterizes survey error for any sampling approach, including non-random samples. Moving to this new paradigm has two important benefits. First, this new paradigm elevates new insights, including the fact that survey error increases with population size when individuals’ decisions to respond are correlated with how they respond. This insight helps us understand how small sampling defects can metastasize into large survey errors. Second, the new paradigm points the field toward new methods that more directly identify and account for sampling defects in a non-random sampling environment. This paper describes the intuition and potential power of these new tools, tools that are further elaborated in Bailey (2023b).","PeriodicalId":417677,"journal":{"name":"Issue 5.3, Summer 2023","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Issue 5.3, Summer 2023","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.9898eede","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

. Scientific fields operate within paradigms that define problems and solutions for a community of researchers. The dominant paradigm in polling centers on random sampling, which is unfortunate because random sampling is, for all practical purposes, dead. The pollsters who try to produce random samples fail because hardly anyone responds. And more and more pollsters do not even try. The field therefore has folded weighting-type adjustments into the paradigm, but this too is unfortunate because weighting works only if we assume away important threats to sampling validity, threats that loom particularly large in the growing non-probability polling sector. This paper argues that the polling field needs to move to a more general paradigm built around the Meng (2018) equation that characterizes survey error for any sampling approach, including non-random samples. Moving to this new paradigm has two important benefits. First, this new paradigm elevates new insights, including the fact that survey error increases with population size when individuals’ decisions to respond are correlated with how they respond. This insight helps us understand how small sampling defects can metastasize into large survey errors. Second, the new paradigm points the field toward new methods that more directly identify and account for sampling defects in a non-random sampling environment. This paper describes the intuition and potential power of these new tools, tools that are further elaborated in Bailey (2023b).
轮询的新范式
. 科学领域在为研究人员群体定义问题和解决方案的范式内运作。民意调查的主要范式集中在随机抽样上,这是不幸的,因为随机抽样实际上已经死了。那些试图随机抽样的民意调查者失败了,因为几乎没有人回应。越来越多的民意调查者甚至不去尝试。因此,该领域已经将权重类型的调整折叠到范式中,但这也是不幸的,因为权重只有在我们假设排除对抽样有效性的重要威胁时才有效,这些威胁在日益增长的非概率民意调查领域尤为突出。本文认为,民意调查领域需要转向围绕Meng(2018)方程建立的更通用的范式,该方程表征了包括非随机样本在内的任何抽样方法的调查误差。转向这种新范式有两个重要的好处。首先,这种新范式提升了新的见解,包括当个人的回应决定与他们的回应方式相关时,调查误差会随着人口规模的增加而增加。这种洞察力帮助我们理解小的抽样缺陷是如何演变成大的调查错误的。第二,新的范例将该领域指向更直接地识别和解释非随机采样环境中的采样缺陷的新方法。本文描述了这些新工具的直觉和潜在力量,这些工具在Bailey (2023b)中得到了进一步阐述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信