Bias and Variance in Multiparty Election Polls

Author:

Selb Peter1ORCID,Chen Sina2ORCID,Körtner John3ORCID,Bosch Philipp4

Affiliation:

1. Professor, Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz , Konstanz, Germany

2. PhD Candidate, Graduate School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of Konstanz , Konstanz, Germany

3. PhD Candidate, Swiss Graduate School of Public Administration (IDHEAP), University of Lausanne , Lausanne, Switzerland

4. Graduate Student, M.Sc. Social and Economic Data Science (SEDS), University of Konstanz , Konstanz, Germany

Abstract

Abstract Recent polling failures highlight that election polls are prone to biases that the margin of error customarily reported with polls does not capture. However, such systematic errors are difficult to assess against the background noise of sampling variance. Shirani-Mehr et al. (2018) developed a hierarchical Bayesian model to disentangle random and systematic errors in poll estimates of two-party vote shares at the election level. The method can inform realistic assessments of poll accuracy. We adapt the model to multiparty elections and improve its temporal flexibility. We then estimate bias and variance in 5,240 German national election polls, 1994–2021. Our analysis suggests that the average absolute election-day bias per party was about 1.5 percentage points, ranging from 0.9 for the Greens to 3.2 for the Christian Democrats. The estimated variance is, on average, about twice as large as that implied by usual margins of error. We find little evidence of house or mode effects. Common biases indicate industry effects due to similar methodological problems. The Supplementary Material provides additional results for 1,751 regional election polls.

Funder

German Research Foundation

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

History and Philosophy of Science,General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science,History,Communication

Reference21 articles.

1. The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data;Aitchison;Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological),1982

2. Election Predictions: An Empirical Assessment;Buchanan;Public Opinion Quarterly,1986

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Encuestas controladas por cuotas: una aproximación empírica a su error total;Revista Mexicana de Opinión Pública;2024-07-17

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3