Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:38:41.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Should More Polls Be Interpreted as Too Close to Call?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2013

Walter W. Hill
Walter W. Hill*
Affiliation:
St. Mary's College of Maryland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

During political campaigns the spread between the popularity of the candidates is a common metric capturing the state of the horse-race feature of the campaign. One candidate is said to be ahead of another by an indicated number of percentage points. If the difference is less than the margin of error, the race is considered too close to call. In two-person races, however, the spread corresponds to a much smaller confidence level than is usually reported because the two numbers used to compute the spread are not independent. The size of the confidence interval that is typically reported is incorrect by a factor of two. Therefore, some spreads that are reported as decisive are races too close to call.

Type
Features
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , April 2013 , pp. 329 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Berinsky, Adam J. 2006. “American Public Opinion in the 1930s and 1940s: The Analysis of Quota-Controlled Sample Survey Data.” Public Opinion Quarterly 70 (4): 499–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, James E. 2008. “Editor's Introduction: Forecasting the 2008 National Elections.” PS: Political Science and Politics 41 (4): 679–82.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., and Wlezien, Christopher. 2009. “Markets vs. Polls as Predictions: A Historical Assessment of US Presidential Elections.” Prepared for presentation at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Hollywood, Florida. May.Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1993. “Why Are American Presidential Polls So Variable When Votes Are So Predictable?” British Journal of Political Science 23 (1): 409–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael, and Rice, Tom. 1992. Forecasting Elections. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Wild, C. J., and Seber, G. A. F.. 1993. “Comparing Two Proportions from the Same Survey.” American Statistician 47 (3): 178–81.Google Scholar
Zeleny, Jeff, and Healy, Patrick. 2008. “Not So Fast Clinton Says about Obama Momentum: Iowa Results Set the Tone in New Hampshire.” New York Times January 7. A16.Google Scholar