The Rise of Polling Errors as Response Rates Decline

The Rise of Polling Errors as Response Rates Decline

As response rates decline, the ⁢risk ⁢of polling errors rises

KNOWLEDGE of many ⁢facets of American ​life comes from ⁣surveys. ⁢Every ten years the Census Bureau asks adults⁣ to tally themselves and their demographic information ⁤in​ an online or mail-in form: a‌ survey. The Bureau of Labour ⁣Statistics (BLS) produces monthly estimates of the unemployment ⁤rate and other ⁣economic numbers that are derived from interviews with‌ tens of thousands of households: ⁢another⁢ survey. And knowledge of ⁢political issues from​ opinion polls, of course, comes from surveys. ​That would ⁢not be a problem if everyone answered ​the pollsters. But not ​everyone does, and the people who don’t ⁢can be very different ‌from those who ‍do.

Take a recent survey conducted by the Wall Street Journal and the ‍National‍ Opinion Research ​Centre (NORC) at the University of Chicago. The​ poll, published ‌in ⁢March, ⁢purportedly showed that the popularity of many American values ‍had fallen precipitously ‍over ‌the past few decades. In 1998 a poll by the Journal and NBC News found that 70% ⁣of adults ‍said “patriotism” was ⁤“very⁣ important” to them; now just 38% do. Similarly,⁤ religion’s score ‍had declined from 62% to 39%; bringing ⁤up a family from 59% to 30%; and community involvement, which ​rose from 47% to‌ 62% by 2019, had crashed to 27%. Only money‍ had become more important to the average adult since 1998:​ 31% then, 43%​ now.

Analysts at the US Census Bureau found that plunging CPS response rates during the covid-19 pandemic made⁢ the survey much less representative of ⁣poor ​Americans. Their ⁤best guess is that ‌the estimate of ‌median household income in 2020 ‍is inflated by $2,000 purely because ‍of a changing population of survey-takers. Another paper, from the Global Labour Organisation, ‍an international non-profit group, ​found that⁤ CPS response rates are ​lower in cities and hubs for manufacturing jobs.

2023-06-22 08:46:55
Source from www.economist.com

Exit mobile version