A View of Survey Results: the 2016 Philippine Elections
Assuming the survey
responses were gathered appropriately (methodologically compliant),
then the estimates of prevalence can be interpreted meaningfully in
terms of an electoral race, provided the percent standard error is
considered.
Bobbi tiglao also
posits that another crucial parameter needs to be estimated and
included in the calculation of voting preference: that of machinery
generated votes, which should be added to the survey responses.
Now since the two
quantities are additive, we can analyze the survey preferences before
or after the machinery generated votes are included, and the results
will be the same. It is more intuitive, though, to consider it at
the end when the quantities are compounded into a single measure.
Let us now go to the
final estimates (survey responses plus machinery generated).
Source: Tiglao, see
FB posts
If we use the SWS
declared standard error */- 6 percent, then the following conclusions
are warranted:
1. there is
seemingly a bimodal distribution, top position or rank, and bottom
position or rank.
2. with standard
errors, a range of values, called confidence intervals [let's call it
for now flux intervals], can be calculated to show how either the
survey measures of voting preference, or the compounded preference
with machinery delivered votes will fluctuate up and down.
3. within the flux
intervals, the candidates with highest “top” votes are
“statistically” tied; the same goes for the candidates with
lowest “bottom” votes, to wit:
The upper tail of
Poe's 32 percent plus the 6 percent of standard error equals 38
percent, which well includes Binay's 34 percent. The lower tail of
Poe (32 percent minus 6 percent of standard error) will include the
two “bottom” candidates Duterte and Roxas
So,
what's the bottom line? The actual results are still a toss up. Until
later updated with attending changes, we now have Poe and Binay
leading; both Duterte and Roxas are at their very heels.
Comments