• @TempermentalAnomaly
    link
    26
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    It is most certainly not a small sample size. It’s what allows for a margin of error of ±3.5%* at the 95% confidence level. Here’s a graph of the margin of error vs sample size for 95% confidence interval.

    With an 11 point margin, there’s a clear separation of the upper limit bar for Trump and lower limit bar for Obama. For a single poll, assuming the rest of it was well designed and executed, this is an important spread. And the reasons are obvious if you look at the report. She’s able to get 10% more Democratic support and 20% more independent voter support.

    Ipsos is a high quality polling company. They don’t make rookie mistakes like sample size. There may be other reasons beyond my reasoning that make this a bad use of polling, but sample size is not it.

    * The source incorrectly reported the margin of error for the full survey, both registered and unregistered participants.

    • @dezmd
      link
      English
      -25 months ago

      A fancy guess is still a guess.

      892 out of 160,000,000+ is a small sample size.

      • @ABCDE
        link
        55 months ago

        It isn’t.

        • @dezmd
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Yes, and I appreciate the scientific method, but applying it with statistics such a singular market research sampling can be dubious because it requires assumptions that aren’t actually validated.

          The more you learn, the more you realize we all have blindspots all overr the place. This result of the provided sample size statistics cannot be proven without iterations, which have not been done.

          The politics of it are chess, while the statistics are just playing tic tac toe while discarding considerations of nuance with a wave of ‘but science’ hand.