Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Study suggests polls overestimate support for Obama, underestimate support for Clinton (and Edwards)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 06:09 AM
Original message
Study suggests polls overestimate support for Obama, underestimate support for Clinton (and Edwards)
A new national study of voters who say they might vote in Democratic primaries and caucuses shows a striking disconnect between their explicit and implicit preferences, according to University of Washington researchers.

When asked who they would vote for, Sen. Barack Obama held a 42 percent to 34 percent margin over Sen. Hilary Clinton. Former senator John Edwards was in third place with 12 percent. However, when the same people took an Implicit Association Test that measures their unconscious or automatic preferences, Clinton was the runaway winner, the favored candidate of 48 percent of the voters. Edwards was second with 27 percent and Obama had 25 percent.

Bethany Albertson, a UW assistant political science professor and Anthony Greenwald, a UW psychology professor and inventor of the Implicit Association Test, emphasized that their participants were not a representative sample of Democrats but were self-selected volunteers who took an experimental test over the Web. The data came from 926 people age 18 and over who took the test between Oct. 16 and Nov. 5. Of that total, 687 people said they might vote in the Democratic primaries.

�In the past, poll numbers have often overestimated support for black candidates when compared to their actual vote percentages, said Albertson. Findings of this study suggest that this familiar pattern may be about to repeat itself in the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries.

�What is new here is a pre-election indicator that this may happen, added Greenwald. We don't know what will happen in the Iowa caucuses when people who say they favor Obama have to convince other participants. And we don't know if some of those participants in the caucuses who say they are planning to vote for Obama will end up choosing Clinton.�

Albertson said implicit preferences may shape the way voters take in new information as the presidential campaign develops.

The Implicit Association Test was developed nearly a decade ago to measure the unconscious roots of people�s thinking and feeling. Since it was created, more than 6 million people have taken versions of the test that have measured unconscious attitudes about such topics as race, gender, sexuality and various ethnic groups. The test is widely used around the world by psychological researchers to probe people's attitudes.

In the researchers� new version participants took the test, which randomly administered a measure of implicit attitudes for either an Obama vs. Clinton race, Edwards vs. Clinton or Obama vs. Edwards. Then they were asked a number of explicit questions, including how warmly they felt toward the candidates, how likely they were to vote and whom they favored.

Albertson and Greenwald said the disconnect between implicit and explicit preferences for Obama held up for both white and black participants as well as for both men and women. Just under 70 percent of the participants in the study were female. Whites made up 72 percent of the sample while blacks numbered 10 percent.

The result doesn't disappear when we just look at men or women or when we look separately at black and white voters. This gives us greater confidence that these results have meaning, said Greenwald.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-12/uow-ssp121807.php

Individuals can take a similar Implicit Association Test for either the leading Democratic or Republican candidates on the Web at https://projectimplicit.net/implicit/demo/featuredtask.html. These versions of the tests allow participants to examine their preferences for Democratic candidates Clinton, Obama, Edwards and Bill Richardson and Republican hopefuls Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain and Mitt Romney. As the primary season proceeds, the tests will be revised to follow the top four candidates for each party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Sancho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 06:27 AM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks for posting this.
Most of us know that pre-election polls are very rough predictors. Polls taken immediately after voting can be pretty accurate if the sampling is good. I think that it's interesting to watch to polls, but some people take them pretty seriously when they appear to change a percent or two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKNancy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 07:14 AM
Response to Original message
2. I'm thinking it might be like 2004
Obama supporters seem much like the Dean supporters. Supporting an essentially moderate Democrat, yet they themselves are very liberal.
Also, I have a feeling that some of that enthusiasm won't translate in the actual caucus attendance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 07:20 AM
Response to Original message
3. Okey-Dokey
We'll see soon enough!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
4. "participants were not a representative sample of Democrats but were self-selected volunteers..."
I thought you needed a representative sample for valid results....

This test is like the Ink Blot Test....you take a look at it and you assign whatever meaning to it you want to!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 07:31 AM
Response to Original message
5. Black candidates have higher polling numbers than votes. HRC's the opposite. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 07:39 AM
Response to Original message
6. The voice of science: "Clinton was the runaway winner."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
durrrty libby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Let's hope the trend continues
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
8. This stuff is fascinating. Since social attitudes change over time, it's always difficult to know
how to handicap social effects in elections.

Elections tell us a lot about society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-19-07 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
9. Wilder had a comfortable lead in VA and ended squeaking out a win on election night. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 17th 2024, 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC