In the era of digital omnipresence, the reliability of polling—a fundamental tool for gauging public opinion—has come under increasing scrutiny. The proliferation of smartphones and the accompanying rise in digital paranoia have significantly complicated the once straightforward task of conducting accurate polls. Here’s how these two factors have reshaped the landscape of modern polling.
The Smartphone Revolution
Smartphones have revolutionized the way we communicate, access information, and participate in society. However, they have also introduced new challenges for pollsters:
- Decline in Landline Usage: Traditional polling methods relied heavily on landline phones. As smartphones became ubiquitous, landline usage plummeted, making it harder for pollsters to reach a representative sample of the population. Many households, especially among younger demographics, no longer have landlines.
- Caller ID and Call Screening: The widespread use of caller ID and call screening apps has led to a significant increase in the number of people who ignore calls from unknown numbers. This has resulted in lower response rates for phone surveys, skewing the data toward those who do answer, often older individuals who may not represent the broader population.
- Text-Based Polling Challenges: While pollsters have adapted by using text messages and online surveys, these methods come with their own set of problems. Text-based polling can suffer from low response rates, as recipients may dismiss the texts as spam or feel uncomfortable responding to unsolicited messages.
The Rise of Digital Paranoia
With the surge in cyber threats, data breaches, and privacy concerns, digital paranoia has become a significant factor in the accuracy of polling:
- Distrust in Institutions: Public trust in institutions, including polling organizations, has eroded. People are increasingly skeptical about sharing their opinions, fearing misuse of their data or unwanted surveillance. This distrust can lead to reluctance in participating in polls or providing honest answers.
- Privacy Concerns: Concerns over privacy have led to stricter regulations on data collection and usage, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe. While these regulations are essential for protecting personal information, they also pose challenges for pollsters who must navigate complex legal requirements to ensure compliance.
- Fear of Repercussions: In highly polarized environments, individuals may fear repercussions for expressing their true opinions. This phenomenon, known as the “shy voter effect,” can lead to inaccurate polling data, as people may either refuse to participate or provide socially desirable responses rather than honest ones.
Adapting to the New Landscape
To address these challenges, pollsters are adopting innovative methods and technologies:
- Mixed-Mode Surveys: Combining multiple modes of data collection—such as phone, online, and face-to-face surveys—can help reach a more representative sample and mitigate the limitations of any single method.
- Advanced Analytics: Utilizing big data and advanced analytics can help pollsters better understand and adjust for biases in their samples. Machine learning algorithms can identify patterns and predict non-response bias, improving the accuracy of polling results.
- Transparency and Trust-Building: Building trust with respondents is crucial. Pollsters are increasingly emphasizing transparency about how data will be used, ensuring confidentiality, and demonstrating the value of public participation in polls.
- Engaging Younger Demographics: Developing strategies to engage younger demographics, such as through social media or gamified surveys, can help increase response rates and improve the representativeness of polling data.
As the world witnesses an unprecedented number of elections and with the U.S. Presidential rematch between Joe Biden and Donald Trump fast approaching, polling companies face immense pressure to address why recent polls have missed the mark, according to Professor W. Joseph Campbell.
“There’s a lot of validity to the question about polling accuracy,” said Prof. Campbell, a tenured professor at American University and author of Gallup: Polling Failure in U.S. Presidential Elections.
Early Indicators of Polling Problems
While many point to the 2016 election of Republican Donald Trump as a significant indicator of flawed polling methods, Prof. Campbell noted that the 2012 election also hinted at these issues. Incumbent President Barack Obama defeated Republican challenger Mitt Romney by almost 4 percentage points—higher than most polls had anticipated.
“That was somewhat higher than the polls were anticipating,” Campbell said, noting that in 2016, many polls predicted a defeat for Trump by Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. Despite winning the popular vote, Clinton unexpectedly lost in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, contrary to poll predictions.
In the 2020 election, polls projected a victory for Democratic candidate Joe Biden, but the margin of victory was narrower than many forecasts suggested. “The pollsters are looking at all these instances and really trying to grapple with it,” Campbell explained. “No one really knows for sure why yet,” referring to recent questions surrounding polling accuracy.
Polling Postmortem
A report by the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) in 2021 sought to identify potential problems with the accuracy of polls in the 2020 and 2016 U.S. presidential elections. The report found that the 2020 polls featured the highest polling error in 40 years for the national popular vote and the highest in at least 20 years for state-level estimates.
The report suggested that nonresponse from the electorate was a significant issue. AAPOR also noted that many pollsters may not have adequately accounted for the influx of new voters in the 2020 election, affecting the accuracy of their predictions. The report ultimately concluded that nonresponse was likely a top reason for polling inaccuracies.
“The primary source of polling error cannot be identified conclusively without knowing how non-respondents and respondents compare,” the report read.
Smartphones and the Decline of Landlines
The problem of nonresponse stretches back several election cycles, Prof. Campbell noted. Traditional polling relied on landline telephones, which have declined significantly over the past decade. While the proliferation of smartphones isn’t necessarily a problem, fewer people are answering calls, which can skew results.
Gallup, a prominent U.S. polling firm, uses both landline and mobile numbers through random digit dialing (RDD) methods. Quinnipiac University also uses RDD and calls mobile phones, emphasizing the importance of reaching cell phone-only users.
Incorporating online polling and text messaging is a strategy some companies have adopted, but these methods are not foolproof. “Personally, if I got a text message from a pollster, I’m inclined not to answer,” Campbell said. “And I think a lot of people feel the same way.”
Increased Polarization and Distrust
Another hypothesis is that increased political polarization leads to voters refusing to participate in polls due to paranoia and distrust in institutions. President Biden himself expressed doubt about recent polls during an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, reflecting a broader skepticism about polling accuracy.
Conversely, Prof. Campbell noted that Trump supporters might be less likely to participate in polls, leading to underrepresentation. “It’s something that pollsters have been discussing for a number of years,” he said. “But again, it remains a hypothesis, it’s not proven.”
Recency Bias and Historical Inaccuracies
Polling inaccuracies are not unique to recent election cycles. Between 1936 and 2020, there have been nine instances where U.S. election polling has been off the mark. One prominent example was the 1948 U.S. presidential election, where polls incorrectly projected a win for Republican challenger Thomas Dewey over Democratic incumbent Harry Truman.
The Future of Polling
Despite the challenges, Prof. Campbell sees reasons for optimism. Election polling is just a small part of a multibillion-dollar industry, which includes consumer preference polling and issue-based polling. Some pollsters have found success in recruiting panels of respondents for regular check-ins, although this method has its own flaws.
Pollsters and political scientists are not in denial about the increasingly inaccurate polls, as demonstrated by AAPOR’s 2021 report on improving accuracy. “How many of these kinds of failures can you sustain consecutively and still remain credible?” Campbell said.
The accuracy of polling in the digital age is under threat from the dual forces of smartphone proliferation and digital paranoia. As society continues to evolve, so too must the methods and practices of pollsters. By embracing innovation and prioritizing trust and transparency, the polling industry can navigate these challenges and continue to provide valuable insights into public opinion.
