Whether you are a voter, or someone who just wants to know how the election is going, you can make use of presidential surveys to get the answers you need. These surveys include pre-election polls and estimates, which give you an idea of how the public feels about the candidates and issues. But there are several things you need to consider when using these surveys, including biases, variability, and failing to adjust for respondents’ education levels.
Pre-election polls
Despite the recent hype surrounding polls, they are not always accurate. There are two main types of pre-election polls: public and private. The former is typically conducted by news organizations, nonprofit groups, and academic institutions. The latter is generally conducted by partisan party organizations.
In the case of pre-election polls for presidential elections, the best way to determine the accuracy of the results is to compare them to the actual results. A national poll is much more likely to correctly identify the winner of the presidential race than a state-level poll.
A national poll will also have a better shot at identifying the winner of the Electoral College. A national poll is also better at measuring public opinion on important issues. A state-level poll might be able to tell you which candidates are likely to win. But a state-level poll might not be able to accurately determine who the winner will be in a tight race.
Another big advantage of a national poll is that the results are not limited to voters who are registered Democrats or Republicans. A national poll can give a more comprehensive picture of how Americans feel on important issues like health care, climate change, and immigration.
A pre-election poll for presidential elections will also include other measures of voter knowledge and attitudes. These include a trial heat question that asks respondents how they plan to vote in the upcoming election.
Pre-election survey estimates
AP VoteCast is a statistical survey of the electorate that includes self-identified registered voters. It is conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago and Fox News. The survey is conducted in English and Spanish. It includes a probability sample of voters as well as a non-probability sample of registered voters.
The AP VoteCast survey combines 50 state-based surveys to provide a statistically accurate picture of voter opinions nationally. It uses a four-step weighting approach to account for non-probability and probability samples separately. It also includes question wording error and sampling error. The margin of sampling error is estimated using a measure of uncertainty. The results are weighted within 10-30 subregions for each state.
In 2016, white voters without college degrees overwhelmingly voted for Donald Trump. However, in key states, such as California and Florida, polls were underrepresentative of this group. In fact, in some cases, white voters without college degrees were underrepresented in polls that had predicted a win for Hillary Clinton.
The 2020 polling error was the highest in at least 20 years for state-level estimates of the vote in presidential and senatorial contests. In addition, it was the largest in 40 years for the national popular vote.
The 2020 task force, which includes members from nonprofit organizations, academia, the media, and industry, based its results on publicly available polls. It found that polls in the final two weeks of the election averaged 4.5 points for national popular vote estimates, the largest in at least 20 years.
Pre-election survey variability
Despite its name, pre-election survey variability is a lot lower than the actual election. There are several reasons for this, one of which is the fact that voters are not particularly informed when the campaign begins. As they learn more, voters become more confident in their opinions.
The most important part of any pre-election survey is the sampling. Each polling organization has its own field procedures. Some of these are not conducive to accurate measurement. This could include not reaching the target population, not having the right respondents or a variety of other factors.
Another factor affecting the accuracy of a survey is the weighting of results. Surveys are weighted to give them more statistical significance. This weighting is typically based on demographic measures. The averaged survey results will be used to calculate the aggregated estimate of voter preferences.
The most basic measure of error is the margin of sampling. The margin of sampling is estimated by measuring the difference between the percentage of voters that are sampled and the percent of those that are not. This margin is expected to be plus or minus 4.5 percentage points for voters and plus or minus 11.0 percentage points for nonvoters. It is important to note that this margin of sampling does not apply to the spread between the candidates.
Other factors that can influence the accuracy of an election survey include the design of the survey, the quality of the data collected, and the number of respondents included in the study. It is a good idea to keep all of these factors in mind.
Pre-election survey biases
Using polling data to predict election outcomes is tricky business. Each survey has its own idiosyncratic biases. They can either bolster or detract from the final results.
One of the most common applications of survey research is pre-election polling. The purpose is to help voters know what to expect in a given election. Aside from the usual trial heat questions, such as who would you vote for in a hypothetical race, polling research typically incorporates other measures of voter knowledge and attitudes.
A study done by the Pew Research Center suggests that a pre-election poll might be underestimating support for white candidates in races where the other candidate is African-American. The study tested an unusually large sample size. The sample was comprised of 563 likely voters, who were polled a week before the 2012 elections.
The survey was part of a broader examination of survey methodology. The American Institute of Public Opinion (AIPO) used hundreds of interviewers across the country to ask about voting patterns in face-to-face interviews.
The survey also asked about voting patterns by mail. It is important to note that AIPO used a much larger sample than the typical poll. This was because it had quotas to fill. As a result, the AIPO survey showed significantly better results than the Literary Digest poll.
It should be noted that the survey does not show any significant effect on party-owned issues. Nevertheless, it does show a significant positive effect on voter participation.
Failing to adjust for respondents’ education level
Several state level surveys have been conducted to coincide with the election of President Barack Obama. One in particular was the New York Times/Siena College poll. The sample size was on the order of 1,814 participants. The survey was conducted from March to June. The results were compiled in a spreadsheet. The study contained a set of relevant demographics. Some of the demographics were more likely to participate in a survey than others. A number of polls, such as the one mentioned above, failed to capture the full complement of voters in question. The sample sizes were on the high side.
The aforementioned study did not mention the fact that respondents were more likely to participate in a survey when they were at least a few years older than their counterparts. This led to a small subset of pollsters being left out of the loop. The samples contained a healthy mix of males and females. The most common gender pairing was women in their mid-twenties. The average age of men in the sample was on the low side. The largest demographic tended to be those in their late twenties to early thirties. The most pronounced differences were found in southern and central New England states.
Race of interviewer
Previously, research has suggested that the race of an interviewer is important to some respondents. However, it has been difficult to quantify the extent to which interviewers’ race impacts political attitudes. A recent study examined the relationship between an interviewer’s race and the political knowledge of Black respondents. Specifically, researchers calculated the skin tone of interviewers and then correlated the perceived race of the interviewer with the assessment of political knowledge. This relationship is not affected by other sources of information.
In a telephone survey, respondents tended to misidentify the race of an interviewer. For example, 32% of black respondents answered questions correctly when they were interviewed by a black interviewer. Similarly, half of nonblacks answered incorrectly when they were interviewed by a black interviewer. This phenomenon is also present in personal interviews.
This racial bias is systematic. It is based on coherent beliefs about race. It may also be a result of social discomfort. In particular, white interviewers tend to rate black respondents less well than they would if they were interviewed by a white interviewer.
One of the implications of this research is that African-Americans may experience a heightened sensitivity to the race of an interviewer. This could explain why black respondents are more likely to agree with the idea that whites are not keeping blacks down. They may also feel uncomfortable because white interviewers are sending signals.
