MISSING NONVOTERS AND MISWEIGHTED SAMPLES: EXPLAINING THE 2015 GREAT BRITISH POLLING MISS

Preelection polls for the 2015 UK General Election missed the final result by a considerable margin: underestimating the Conservative Party and overestimating Labour. Analyzing evidence for five theories of why the polls missed using British Election Study (BES) data, we find limited evidence for sy...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Public opinion quarterly 2017-10, Vol.81 (3), p.661-687
Hauptverfasser: MELLON, JONATHAN, PROSSER, CHRISTOPHER
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 687
container_issue 3
container_start_page 661
container_title Public opinion quarterly
container_volume 81
creator MELLON, JONATHAN
PROSSER, CHRISTOPHER
description Preelection polls for the 2015 UK General Election missed the final result by a considerable margin: underestimating the Conservative Party and overestimating Labour. Analyzing evidence for five theories of why the polls missed using British Election Study (BES) data, we find limited evidence for systematic vote intention misreporting, late swing, systematically different preferences among “don’t knows,” or differential turnout of parties’ supporters. By comparing the BES face-to-face probability sample and BES Internet panel, we show that the online survey’s polling error is primarily caused by undersampling nonvoters, then weighting respondents to represent the general population. Consequently, demographic groups with a low probability of voting are overweighted within the voter subsample. Finally, we show that this mechanism is likely partially responsible for the polls overestimating the Liberal Democrats in 2010, illustrating that this is a longstanding problem.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/poq/nfx015
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_jstor_primary_26801742</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26801742</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26801742</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-j177t-2e82af7b02712d40629d1bf878511f274974e89acb5ca7a8886aa76c7bed384e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotjE1Lw0AUABdRMFYv3oVcPcTue2933-YY2pgG0kRM_LiVzRc0VFuTHvTfW9C5DMxhhLgF-QAypPlh_zX_7L8l6DPhgSYONBGcC09KooAMvl-Kq2ka5AlU6In7dVqWaZ74eZG_FlX8XPpRvvRP9S1Ok1UVL_0yWj9lcXktLnq3m7qbf8_Ey2NcLVZBViTpIsqCAZiPAXYWXc-1RAZslTQYtlD3lq0G6JFVyKqzoWtq3Th21lrjHJuG664lqzqaibu_7zAd9-PmMG4_3PizQWMlsEL6BTEsPGA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>MISSING NONVOTERS AND MISWEIGHTED SAMPLES: EXPLAINING THE 2015 GREAT BRITISH POLLING MISS</title><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>EBSCOhost Political Science Complete</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>MELLON, JONATHAN ; PROSSER, CHRISTOPHER</creator><creatorcontrib>MELLON, JONATHAN ; PROSSER, CHRISTOPHER</creatorcontrib><description>Preelection polls for the 2015 UK General Election missed the final result by a considerable margin: underestimating the Conservative Party and overestimating Labour. Analyzing evidence for five theories of why the polls missed using British Election Study (BES) data, we find limited evidence for systematic vote intention misreporting, late swing, systematically different preferences among “don’t knows,” or differential turnout of parties’ supporters. By comparing the BES face-to-face probability sample and BES Internet panel, we show that the online survey’s polling error is primarily caused by undersampling nonvoters, then weighting respondents to represent the general population. Consequently, demographic groups with a low probability of voting are overweighted within the voter subsample. Finally, we show that this mechanism is likely partially responsible for the polls overestimating the Liberal Democrats in 2010, illustrating that this is a longstanding problem.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0033-362X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-5331</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/poq/nfx015</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>Public opinion quarterly, 2017-10, Vol.81 (3), p.661-687</ispartof><rights>The Author 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26801742$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26801742$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27924,27925,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>MELLON, JONATHAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PROSSER, CHRISTOPHER</creatorcontrib><title>MISSING NONVOTERS AND MISWEIGHTED SAMPLES: EXPLAINING THE 2015 GREAT BRITISH POLLING MISS</title><title>Public opinion quarterly</title><description>Preelection polls for the 2015 UK General Election missed the final result by a considerable margin: underestimating the Conservative Party and overestimating Labour. Analyzing evidence for five theories of why the polls missed using British Election Study (BES) data, we find limited evidence for systematic vote intention misreporting, late swing, systematically different preferences among “don’t knows,” or differential turnout of parties’ supporters. By comparing the BES face-to-face probability sample and BES Internet panel, we show that the online survey’s polling error is primarily caused by undersampling nonvoters, then weighting respondents to represent the general population. Consequently, demographic groups with a low probability of voting are overweighted within the voter subsample. Finally, we show that this mechanism is likely partially responsible for the polls overestimating the Liberal Democrats in 2010, illustrating that this is a longstanding problem.</description><issn>0033-362X</issn><issn>1537-5331</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNotjE1Lw0AUABdRMFYv3oVcPcTue2933-YY2pgG0kRM_LiVzRc0VFuTHvTfW9C5DMxhhLgF-QAypPlh_zX_7L8l6DPhgSYONBGcC09KooAMvl-Kq2ka5AlU6In7dVqWaZ74eZG_FlX8XPpRvvRP9S1Ok1UVL_0yWj9lcXktLnq3m7qbf8_Ey2NcLVZBViTpIsqCAZiPAXYWXc-1RAZslTQYtlD3lq0G6JFVyKqzoWtq3Th21lrjHJuG664lqzqaibu_7zAd9-PmMG4_3PizQWMlsEL6BTEsPGA</recordid><startdate>20171001</startdate><enddate>20171001</enddate><creator>MELLON, JONATHAN</creator><creator>PROSSER, CHRISTOPHER</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20171001</creationdate><title>MISSING NONVOTERS AND MISWEIGHTED SAMPLES</title><author>MELLON, JONATHAN ; PROSSER, CHRISTOPHER</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-j177t-2e82af7b02712d40629d1bf878511f274974e89acb5ca7a8886aa76c7bed384e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>MELLON, JONATHAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PROSSER, CHRISTOPHER</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Public opinion quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>MELLON, JONATHAN</au><au>PROSSER, CHRISTOPHER</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>MISSING NONVOTERS AND MISWEIGHTED SAMPLES: EXPLAINING THE 2015 GREAT BRITISH POLLING MISS</atitle><jtitle>Public opinion quarterly</jtitle><date>2017-10-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>81</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>661</spage><epage>687</epage><pages>661-687</pages><issn>0033-362X</issn><eissn>1537-5331</eissn><abstract>Preelection polls for the 2015 UK General Election missed the final result by a considerable margin: underestimating the Conservative Party and overestimating Labour. Analyzing evidence for five theories of why the polls missed using British Election Study (BES) data, we find limited evidence for systematic vote intention misreporting, late swing, systematically different preferences among “don’t knows,” or differential turnout of parties’ supporters. By comparing the BES face-to-face probability sample and BES Internet panel, we show that the online survey’s polling error is primarily caused by undersampling nonvoters, then weighting respondents to represent the general population. Consequently, demographic groups with a low probability of voting are overweighted within the voter subsample. Finally, we show that this mechanism is likely partially responsible for the polls overestimating the Liberal Democrats in 2010, illustrating that this is a longstanding problem.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/poq/nfx015</doi><tpages>27</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0033-362X
ispartof Public opinion quarterly, 2017-10, Vol.81 (3), p.661-687
issn 0033-362X
1537-5331
language eng
recordid cdi_jstor_primary_26801742
source EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; EBSCOhost Political Science Complete; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection
title MISSING NONVOTERS AND MISWEIGHTED SAMPLES: EXPLAINING THE 2015 GREAT BRITISH POLLING MISS
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T08%3A40%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=MISSING%20NONVOTERS%20AND%20MISWEIGHTED%20SAMPLES:%20EXPLAINING%20THE%202015%20GREAT%20BRITISH%20POLLING%20MISS&rft.jtitle=Public%20opinion%20quarterly&rft.au=MELLON,%20JONATHAN&rft.date=2017-10-01&rft.volume=81&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=661&rft.epage=687&rft.pages=661-687&rft.issn=0033-362X&rft.eissn=1537-5331&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfx015&rft_dat=%3Cjstor%3E26801742%3C/jstor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26801742&rfr_iscdi=true