Changes

===Opinion Polls ===

===Opinion Polls ===

Opinion Polls are survey research <ref> http://www.galluppoll.com/help/faq.aspx?ID=249 </ref> of public opinion and aspirations <ref> http://www.galluppoll.com/help/faq.aspx?ID=423 </ref> using probability sampling. "Probability sampling is the fundamental basis for all survey research. The basic principle: a randomly selected, small percent of a population of people <i>can</i> represent the attitudes, opinions or projected behavior of all the people, if the sample is selected correctly." The purpose: "The fundamental goal of a survey is to come up with the same result that would have been obtained had every single member of a population been interviewed." <ref> http://media.gallup.com/PDF/FAQ/HowArePolls.pdf </ref>

Opinion Polls are survey research <ref> http://www.galluppoll.com/help/faq.aspx?ID=249 </ref> of [[public opinion]] and aspirations <ref> http://www.galluppoll.com/help/faq.aspx?ID=423 </ref> using probability sampling. "Probability sampling is the fundamental basis for all survey research. The basic principle: a randomly selected, small percent of a population of people <i>can</i> represent the attitudes, opinions or projected behavior of all the people, if the sample is selected correctly." The purpose: "The fundamental goal of a survey is to come up with the same result that would have been obtained had every single member of a population been interviewed." <ref> http://media.gallup.com/PDF/FAQ/HowArePolls.pdf </ref>

===Ensuring a Good Sample===

===Ensuring a Good Sample===

Gallup notes, "People generally believe the results of polls, but they do not believe in the scientific principles on which the polls are based. Most say "that a survey of 1,500 to 2,000 respondents -- a larger than average sample size for national polls -- <i>cannot</i> represent the views of all Americans." <ref> http://media.gallup.com/PDF/FAQ/HowArePolls.pdf </ref> Gallup then carefully explains how their sampling takes place and how, in interpreting the results, "several standard caveats" should be observed. The reason for these caveats (and not all polls meticulously observe these caveats, as noted below), is to make sure the sample is not skewed or biased.  

Gallup notes, "People generally believe the results of polls, but they do not believe in the scientific principles on which the polls are based. Most say "that a survey of 1,500 to 2,000 respondents -- a larger than average sample size for national polls -- <i>cannot</i> represent the views of all Americans." <ref> http://media.gallup.com/PDF/FAQ/HowArePolls.pdf </ref> Gallup then carefully explains how their [[sampling]] takes place and how, in interpreting the results, "several standard caveats" should be observed. The reason for these caveats (and not all polls meticulously observe these caveats, as noted below), is to make sure the sample is not skewed or biased.  

Although opinion polls can be instructive in understanding where a populace is on any issue, issues such as our inability to see the questions asked or the demographic of who was asked the question can bias a poll's result.  

Although opinion polls can be instructive in understanding where a populace is on any issue, issues such as our inability to see the questions asked or the [[demographic]] of who was asked the question can bias a poll's result.  

For example - When "secret" polls are given out without our being able to see the data and scrutinize it, such as the "secret" poll which found that "Iraqis support attacks on British troops" <ref> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml </ref> wholesale acceptance of the polling result is not merited by the public as a trustworthy result since we cannot verify the data which is behind the poll result. The polling numbers, questions asked of the respondents and demographics which were used are not included or referenced in how this "secret" poll was conducted in the above reference (hence the fact it is called a "secret" poll). The lack of open disclosure and the fact that it was used to discount the intelligence to that point which was quoted in the same article as, "The secret poll appears to contradict claims made by Gen Sir Mike Jackson, the Chief of the General Staff, who only days ago congratulated British soldiers for "supporting the Iraqi people in building a new and better Iraq"".. leads critics to conclude that this is not a fair or accurate assessment of Iraqi opinion. Also, the article states, "The findings differ markedly from a survey carried out by the BBC in March 2004 in which the overwhelming consensus among the 2,500 Iraqis questioned was that life was good. More of those questioned supported the war than opposed it." It also contradicts the optimism shown by the Iraqis in the polls taken (March 2007) quoted in the Conservapedia entry "Iraq War" under the headline "Iraqi Liberation."

For example - When "secret" polls are given out without our being able to see the data and scrutinize it, such as the "secret" poll which found that "[[Iraq]]is support attacks on British troops" <ref> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml </ref> wholesale acceptance of the polling result is not merited by the public as a trustworthy result since we cannot verify the data which is behind the poll result. The polling numbers, questions asked of the respondents and demographics which were used are not included or referenced in how this "secret" poll was conducted in the above reference (hence the fact it is called a "secret" poll). The lack of open disclosure and the fact that it was used to discount the intelligence to that point which was quoted in the same article as, "The [[secret poll]] appears to contradict claims made by Gen Sir Mike Jackson, the Chief of the General Staff, who only days ago congratulated British soldiers for "supporting the Iraqi people in building a new and better Iraq"".. leads critics to conclude that this is not a fair or accurate assessment of Iraqi opinion. Also, the article states, "The findings differ markedly from a survey carried out by the [[BBC]] in March 2004 in which the overwhelming consensus among the 2,500 Iraqis questioned was that life was good. More of those questioned supported the war than opposed it." It also contradicts the optimism shown by the Iraqis in the polls taken (March 2007) quoted in the Conservapedia entry "Iraq War" under the headline "Iraqi Liberation."

It is, therefore, important to understand that to ensure an accurate polling result, the sample must be sufficiently representative to extrapolate.

It is, therefore, important to understand that to ensure an accurate polling result, the sample must be sufficiently representative to extrapolate.

<b>2) Who was asked the Question? - Demographics</b>  

<b>2) Who was asked the Question? - Demographics</b>  

If a certain set of people are asked a question, the bias within that populace can be used to say that the entire population believes what that one group believes. For instance, in Iraq, house to house respondents of several hundred to thousand would be expected to give a positive result when asked whether they felt Saddam was a good ruler of the country of Iraq if the respondent sample was living in Tikrit, Saddam's hometown; but in Northern Kurdistan in the areas which contain survivors who withstood his gas attacks and relocation efforts, the sampling of several hundred to thousand respondents would not agree with the Tikrit responses. And neither of these responses would be truly indicative of the response of the Iraqi people <i>as a whole</i>. Also, surveying the city of Baghdad about their views about how bad terrorism in their country is would not be representative of the country of Iraq as a whole since <i> most </i> of Iraq is not experiencing terrorist attacks, but the capital city of Baghdad is. The sampling base must not be only numerical but widespread enough to be indicative of the entire populace's views on any topic which claims to represent an entire country's view.

If a certain set of people are asked a question, the bias within that populace can be used to say that the entire population believes what that one group believes. For instance, in Iraq, house to house respondents of several hundred to thousand would be expected to give a positive result when asked whether they felt [[Saddam]] was a good ruler of the country of Iraq if the respondent sample was living in Tikrit, Saddam's hometown; but in Northern [[Kurdistan]] in the areas which contain survivors who withstood his gas attacks and relocation efforts, the sampling of several hundred to thousand respondents would not agree with the Tikrit responses. And neither of these responses would be truly indicative of the response of the Iraqi people <i>as a whole</i>. Also, surveying the city of Baghdad about their views about how bad terrorism in their country is would not be representative of the country of Iraq as a whole since <i> most </i> of Iraq is not experiencing terrorist attacks, but the capital city of [[Baghdad]] is. The sampling base must not be only numerical but widespread enough to be indicative of the entire populace's views on any topic which claims to represent an entire country's view.

<b>3) Factual, but a question leading toward a result.</b>

<b>3) Factual, but a question leading toward a result.</b>