This article assumes, for the sake of analysis, that the Senate election will be a double-dissolution under the new Senate system. Neither of these things are yet confirmed, but both appear highly likely.
I thought that there had been no polling at all of the Senate races yet, and innocently told a journalist so this week, but to my surprise reports of not one but two Senate polls have surfaced (one since I made that comment). There are also many reports of an (apparently unpublished) Australia Institute analysis that claims that from five to nine non-Green crossbenchers could get up at a double dissolution, apparently based on commissioned Senate polling from ReachTEL and Research Now. The Research Now (an online panel poll a la Essential) polling has been published but the main thing I can find on the ReachTEL is an AFR report from a month ago (!) that had somehow escaped my notice.
Showing posts with label phone vs online. Show all posts
Showing posts with label phone vs online. Show all posts
Saturday, April 23, 2016
Saturday, June 27, 2015
Could A UK-Style Mass Pollster Fail Happen In Australia?
Advance Summary
1. Recently all major final polls and the vast majority of analysts failed to predict the UK election correctly.
2. Random sampling error, "shy Tory effect" and late swing probably did not make major contributions to this outcome.
3. More likely causes include herding (although this has not been conclusively shown to have happened), the difficulty of estimating turnout, and the abundance of essentially non-random "panel polling" methods.
4. Australian elections are easier to poll for because almost everyone votes and because there is very little tactical voting in the Lower House.
5. Despite this there is a greater risk of high average polling errors at the next federal election because of a rapid turnover of polling ownership and methods, which will make it more difficult for pollsters to detect issues with their methods.
6. Potential for Labor support to be soft even in very late polling also appears at this very early stage to be likely to be higher than normal.
1. Recently all major final polls and the vast majority of analysts failed to predict the UK election correctly.
2. Random sampling error, "shy Tory effect" and late swing probably did not make major contributions to this outcome.
3. More likely causes include herding (although this has not been conclusively shown to have happened), the difficulty of estimating turnout, and the abundance of essentially non-random "panel polling" methods.
4. Australian elections are easier to poll for because almost everyone votes and because there is very little tactical voting in the Lower House.
5. Despite this there is a greater risk of high average polling errors at the next federal election because of a rapid turnover of polling ownership and methods, which will make it more difficult for pollsters to detect issues with their methods.
6. Potential for Labor support to be soft even in very late polling also appears at this very early stage to be likely to be higher than normal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)