THE PLANK NOVEMBER 30, 2007
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Mike points
out at The Stump that a Clemson poll putting Barack Obama only
two points ahead of Hillary in South
Carolina has been smacked
down by new evidence pegging Clinton to win by 23 points. Yowch.
Of course, this instance underscores the inconsistency of
polling numbers, and the need for averages (RCP is now a full-on obsession),
but further, it brings to mind a massive gap in even the most precise polling methodology:
cellular phone users.
I haven't had a land line in four years. No, five. Sure, I
don't live in Iowa (none of my resident states, past and present, has any hope of swaying the
election), but I am as rabidly abreast of the issues as any--polled--voter. Why
is no one calling me? In this day and age, how many more cell-phone-only voters
are excluded from the conversation?
If someone knows more about whether mobile phone numbers are
included in local polls, do tell. For now it seems obvious that a large sector
of the electorate (probably young, but with a decent chunk at voting age) is
being left out of the poll-driven national discussion. How to account for this?
And, more importantly, which candidate can expect an unexpected surge among
these unpolled masses?
Update: Noam points me to a Pew study
that suggests the 'cell-only' public doesn't significantly alter poll
results. I looked a little closer, and that's true, except for the
issue of gay marriage--a metric with clear generational correlation.
Mobile users approved at a margin of 51-37 over non-cell users(though
the landliners carried the day; their 37% was the reported figure). If
the exclusion of mobile users excludes all equally, it should have no
effect on election-day results. But if an old/young divide in the
electorate tracks onto a cell/no-cell divide, the candidate doing
better among youth can expect a bump. Call me!
--Dayo Olopade
8 comments
Doesn't RDD methodology (Random Digit Dialing) solve this? RDD was once criticized for excluding voters with no phone but now it's even better, since phones tend to be one per person nowadays, instead of one per household as it was back in the day.
My understanding was that RDD was the most common method used, but I'm not a journalist, or else I'd look it up.
- stgla
November 30, 2007 at 2:01pm
No, cellphones are on a no-call list automatically. This is because the receiving party is charged for calls. RDD will still exclude Cellphones.
- dbhuff
November 30, 2007 at 2:56pm
Even with random digit dialing, the dialing system has to be loaded with the exchange prefixes for cell phones. (Even with cell phone proliferation, not all exchange prefixes are active.) The question may be whether survey labs are intentionally omitting the exchange prefixes for cell phones.
Even if the exchange prefixes are loaded, I - and I imagine many other cell phone users - would still not participate. If I get a call on my cell phone from a number that is not easily identifiable, I just won't answer. I'm not going to waste my money or my minutes on people who can't dial correctly, won't properly identify with caller ID. If it's important, they should leave a message.
- epackard-02
November 30, 2007 at 2:58pm
I've been polled once on my cell phone. It was on the use of medical marijuana, of all things, but I did get polled.
- drdannyu
November 30, 2007 at 3:14pm
This issue has been discussed quite a bit among academics and public opinion researchers. See, for instance, the forthcoming special issue of *Public Opinion Quarterly*.
- msilverz
November 30, 2007 at 3:40pm
Yeah, polling brought to you by the same taters who introduced Kudzu to SC. I'm still hoping to have Pickens County and Clemson gifted to Georgia.
- mpatrickhendri
November 30, 2007 at 4:51pm
You should look more carefully at the Pew study. It fands LARGE differences between cell-only and others. The biggest are age (cell-only younger) and marital status (land-lanes much more married--probably age-related, too). The reason that the cell-only don't have much impact on national results is that they are still not a large percentage of the population.
But, on issues where there are large differences by age (e.g., gay marriage) the exclusion of cell-only folks can skew a survey. Given the relatively small sample size of local polls and potentially large differnces in preferences by age, surveys that do not take into account the cell-only population might well continue to differ significantly from others (and, possibly, from the underlying "truth").
- jpassel
November 30, 2007 at 5:10pm
These days, a Democratic presidential primary in South Carolina -- or most any state in the deep South -- is irrelevant. It's like holding a primary in Russia.
- jm_rice
December 1, 2007 at 2:26pm