Latest Polls and Latest Odds

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Dee-till-eh-Deh?

[Ad Lib]

Libby

I would be more inclined to agree with your contention that asking 3 leading questions in advance of asking the referendum question was dodgy if this exchange hadn't happened last year

Can you explain why you consider the referendum question not to be leading when "No" use a preamble, whilst maintaining that it is misleading when "Yes" ask the same referendum question as question number 4?

I didn't say that asking the referendum question is misleading. I said asking leading questions before the referendum question is misleading. Asking leading questions isn't the same as providing a leading preamble.

In any case, I have no problem with explanatory preambles. That's what you've just quoted. An explanatory preamble. Not a leading one.

"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an independent country and this was the question, how would you vote?" is not leading.

Just as the preamble in the SNP Panelbase question also wasn't leading. It is explanatory:

"There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question"

This is a fundamentally different issue from the asking of leading questions like:

"Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, independent country"

and

"Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish Government or the Westminster Government?"

Before going on to provide the factual context behind the referendum and then asking the question.

[Confidemus]

Once, just once, Ad Lib, try to be concise.

Please.

[Colkitto]

They used YouGov to conduct the poll for them, giving them the criteria they wanted them to use. The infamous SNP leading questions invalidated the reputatability of that poll every bit as much as Progressive Scottish Opinion asking YouGov to use different methodology does.

But it wasn't a YouGov poll. They may have used a YouGov panel but this poll from the question to the weighting was Progressive Scottish Opinion.

If it had been conducted by YouGov they would have to have produced the data tables within 48 hours.

So not only was there a dodgy question, there was dodgy weighting of data and a blank refusal to release the data tables.

Panelbase used the ballot question and their data could be checked as they released the data tables as per member guidelines of the British Polling Council.

To try and equate both polling organisations is ludicrous.

[Colkitto]

Just to be clear, are you maintaining that the Panelbase poll commissioned by the SNP that asked leading questions was a reputable poll using acceptable methodology, giving an accurate picture of public opinion in line with the industry's best practices?

I didn't accuse Panelbase of rigging a poll. I was just trying to be helpful in pointing out making such a claim could lead to legal action.

Edited May 12, 2014 by Colkitto

[Ad Lib]

But it wasn't a YouGov poll. They may have used a YouGov panel but this poll from the question to the weighting was Progressive Scottish Opinion.

If it had been conducted by YouGov they would have to have produced the data tables within 48 hours.

So not only was there a dodgy question, there was dodgy weighting of data and a blank refusal to release the data tables.

Panelbase used the ballot question and their data could be checked as they released the data tables as per member guidelines of the British Polling Council.

To try and equate both polling organisations is ludicrous.

If the data was collected through the YouGov panel then it was a YouGov poll. How the commissioning company wants the data weighted is a matter for them.

I'm not equating the two instances. I am saying they are both, for different reasons, not credible or reliable polls, because of the interference in good practice by those commissioning them.

[strichener]

If the data was collected through the YouGov panel then it was a YouGov poll. How the commissioning company wants the data weighted is a matter for them.

I'm not equating the two instances. I am saying they are both, for different reasons, not credible or reliable polls, because of the interference in good practice by those commissioning them.

Surely the difference in credibility is substantial based on the fact that only one of these polls actually released their data tables which would be normal practice for a credible polling company.

[Colkitto]

If the data was collected through the YouGov panel then it was a YouGov poll. How the commissioning company wants the data weighted is a matter for them.

I'm not equating the two instances. I am saying they are both, for different reasons, not credible or reliable polls, because of the interference in good practice by those commissioning them.

But it can't be a YouGov poll as they are a member of the British Polling Council and would be bound to releasing the data tables within 48 hours.

But you are equating them by saying "both, for different reasons, not credible or reliable polls" That is equating them and in my opinion rather unfairly, as one polling company is playing by the rules in both weighting methodology and releasing of data and one is not

[Ad Lib]

Surely the difference in credibility is substantial based on the fact that only one of these polls actually released their data tables which would be normal practice for a credible polling company.

If one poll company does one thing which renders its poll not credible, then it should be disregarded. If another does two things, each of which on their own render their poll not credible, then it too should be disregarded. They are both completely unreliable.

But it can't be a YouGov poll as they are a member of the British Polling Council and would be bound to releasing the data tables within 48 hours.

But you are equating them by saying "both, for different reasons, not credible or reliable polls" That is equating them and in my opinion rather unfairly, as one polling company is playing by the rules in both weighting methodology and releasing of data and one is not

No, I am not equating them. In much the same way as saying "Partick Thistle and Greenock Morton are both members of the Scottish Professional Football League" I am not saying they are equal. Partick Thistle are objectively better.

How transparent you are with the releasing of data has no bearing on whether or not your poll is in fact reliable, though it may cast doubt on whether it is reliable.

Different companies have different approaches as to how data should be weighted, and the British Polling Council does not prescribe a particular approach. Nor indeed are any of the polling companies bound to use that methodology should a client specifically request only the raw data with a view to weighting based on their own criteria, or request that they weight responses differently for their purposes. All that does is, potentially, reduce the usefulness of the information to the requesting client except with reference to confirmation bias if that is what they're after.

By similar sentiment, polling companies have policies and standards about avoiding leading questions, but they are not bound by them. If a client asks them to ask leading questions, they will do so, but it will reduce the usefulness of the information to the requesting client, except with reference to confirmation bias if that is what they're after.

In both instances, methodology has rendered the poll wholly unreliable as a fair indicator of public opinion against common industry standards. The non-membership of PSO to the BPC is just further confirmation as to the inadequacy of its organisation. It doesn't mean the SNP commissioned poll is any more credible.

[doulikefish]

Seemingly theres an interesting ipsos mori poll not being released

[Colkitto]

If one poll company does one thing which renders its poll not credible, then it should be disregarded. If another does two things, each of which on their own render their poll not credible, then it too should be disregarded. They are both completely unreliable.

No, I am not equating them. In much the same way as saying "Partick Thistle and Greenock Morton are both members of the Scottish Professional Football League" I am not saying they are equal. Partick Thistle are objectively better.

How transparent you are with the releasing of data has no bearing on whether or not your poll is in fact reliable, though it may cast doubt on whether it is reliable.

Different companies have different approaches as to how data should be weighted, and the British Polling Council does not prescribe a particular approach. Nor indeed are any of the polling companies bound to use that methodology should a client specifically request only the raw data with a view to weighting based on their own criteria, or request that they weight responses differently for their purposes. All that does is, potentially, reduce the usefulness of the information to the requesting client except with reference to confirmation bias if that is what they're after.

By similar sentiment, polling companies have policies and standards about avoiding leading questions, but they are not bound by them. If a client asks them to ask leading questions, they will do so, but it will reduce the usefulness of the information to the requesting client, except with reference to confirmation bias if that is what they're after.

In both instances, methodology has rendered the poll wholly unreliable as a fair indicator of public opinion against common industry standards. The non-membership of PSO to the BPC is just further confirmation as to the inadequacy of its organisation. It doesn't mean the SNP commissioned poll is any more credible.

But you are using the Panelbase poll as a comparison to the PSO poll in an effort to discredit Panelbase. So in effect you are equating both pollsters.

Which in my opinion is entirely unfair as Panelbase are a member of the BPC, use widely accepted weighting methodology and are completely transparent.

This of course doesn't apply to PSO and by not releasing their data tables really does make you suspicious that they are trying to manipulate public opinion rather than trying to gauge public opinion.

On available limited information of their weighting methods they state they weighted their recent poll on "Scotland's demographic profile" I have absolutely no idea what that means. And I know of no other polling organisation anywhere that uses that method of weighting.

If you want to have a go at Panelbase then that's your right to do so, but don't try and discredit them by comparing them to PSO.

[renton]

But you are using the Panelbase poll as a comparison to the PSO poll in an effort to discredit Panelbase. So in effect you are equating both pollsters.

Which in my opinion is entirely unfair as Panelbase are a member of the BPC, use widely accepted weighting methodology and are completely transparent.

This of course doesn't apply to PSO and by not releasing their data tables really does make you suspicious that they are trying to manipulate public opinion rather than trying to gauge public opinion.

On available limited information of their weighting methods they state they weighted their recent poll on "Scotland's demographic profile" I have absolutely no idea what that means. And I know of no other polling organisation anywhere that uses that method of weighting.

If you want to have a go at Panelbase then that's your right to do so, but don't try and discredit them by comparing them to PSO.

Yeah, well the methodology might be shit, but the funny thing is they still ended up showing a massive 9 point swing to yes from their previous poll that the PSO carried out. not going to lose much sleep over that, despite BT's attempt to conflate the PSO/Yougov and Yougov polls to show a widening of the No vote.

[renton]

While not strictly Indy polls, we've now got a couple of polls showing a slim Tory lead at Westminster, and ICM showing the tories in the lead for the EU elections with Labour bumped down to third, behind UKIP. Available data suggests that there are a lot of people who conflate independence with the like or dislike of a particular party, as such there is a percentage of people who would be more willing to vote Yes if they thought the Tories would win in 2015.

[Ad Lib]

But you are using the Panelbase poll as a comparison to the PSO poll in an effort to discredit Panelbase. So in effect you are equating both pollsters.

No, I'm not trying to discredit Panelbase. I'm discrediting polls commissioned by people who want pollsters to do things which are not methodologically sound.

The Panelbase poll was invalid because of what the SNP asked them to ask, not because of any aspect of methodology chosen by Panelbase.

[Colkitto]

No, I'm not trying to discredit Panelbase. I'm discrediting polls commissioned by people who want pollsters to do things which are not methodologically sound.

The Panelbase poll was invalid because of what the SNP asked them to ask, not because of any aspect of methodology chosen by Panelbase.

Why are you only concentrating on a SNP poll? We have all seen the tricks other parties get up to with commissioned polls.

[H_B]

I didn't accuse Panelbase of rigging a poll. I was just trying to be helpful in pointing out making such a claim could lead to legal action.

Bring it on.

[H_B]

But you are using the Panelbase poll as a comparison to the PSO poll in an effort to discredit Panelbase. So in effect you are equating both pollsters.

Which in my opinion is entirely unfair as Panelbase are a member of the BPC, use widely accepted weighting methodology and are completely transparent.

This of course doesn't apply to PSO and by not releasing their data tables really does make you suspicious that they are trying to manipulate public opinion rather than trying to gauge public opinion.

On available limited information of their weighting methods they state they weighted their recent poll on "Scotland's demographic profile" I have absolutely no idea what that means. And I know of no other polling organisation anywhere that uses that method of weighting.

If you want to have a go at Panelbase then that's your right to do so, but don't try and discredit them by comparing them to PSO.

Just out of interest, as you still pretending the SNP bought poll is valuable?

Yes or no?

[~~~]

[H_B]

Looks like that is YET ANOTHER example of a newspaper toeing the Unionist line..

What do the SNP have to do to get a positive news report?

Am I doing it right?

[Colkitto]

Just out of interest, as you still pretending the SNP bought poll is valuable?

Yes or no?

The commissioned poll was valuable at the time. We've moved on...