mysterypollster

i posted the following comment at mysterypollster http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2005/01/the_reluctant_b.html#comments :

i havent had a chance to fully analyse the report yet - but did notice a couple of things that people might consider when looking at the WPE numbers:
1) the stats about the interviewers are incomplete - the report (somewhat confusingly) describes why n=1250 (rather than 1480), however for many of the remaining questions, n is approx 1100, and 1118, and 1127, and 1180, and 1240 etc - so just keep an eye out for that. if they cant even interview their own interviewers properly then...
2) keep an eye on the sub-sample n sizes for each issue the report discusses - sometimes the report draws apparent conclusions based on small numbers
3) similarly, be wary of making simplistic logic 'shortcuts' - for example, one of the memes which seems to be catching fire is that 'smart people had higher error rates (presumed bias)' - although the data doesnt necessarily say that - its true that the 'advanced degree' had the highest mean WPE, but it isnt significantly higher than '1-3 years college' - and if you look at MedianWPE, the 'smartest' category has the 2nd lowest error, *much* better than '1-3 years college' (5.2 vs 7.0)
4) also, be aware that some of the statements made in the report are somewhat misleading - for example, "The completion rates tend to be slightly higher in precincts with more educated interviewers".
given that the '1-3 yr' category included *half* the interviewers, and they only got 53% completion, the AdvGrads' 60% completion rate seems 'a lot' higher.

the above points arent designed to make any particular point - other than we need to be careful when looking at the numbers (of course) and be wary of some of the apparent conclusions.

separately, to MP's "Reluctant Bush Responder" point, it ought be noted that the nsize of 'Mod Rep' category is 250% larger than the 'Mod Dem' category, which is curious in itself, and could dwarf any of the other issues.

cheers.