The Real Value of Poll Data

Melinda and I have responded to a recent Newsweek article on abortion and common ground. The article is based on a Third Way press release which claims 72% of Americans "believe that the decision to have an abortion should be left up to a woman, her family and her doctor" and 69% believe that "abortion is 'the taking of human life.'

Polls are important for public discussion, but usually not because they help us get clear on public opinion. They're important because the opinions they report actually have weight with people. Polls are important because people believe them. In actuality, abortion polls tend to disguise public opinion long enough for people to follow suit. It's some sort of weird self-fulfilling prophecy.

Newsweek and Third Way are describing a poll done by the Feldman Group. The report said 72% agree that the abortion decision should be up to women (i.e. legal) and that 69% agree that abortion takes a human life. At first glance, it appears that about 70% of the public thinks taking a human life should be legal. The problem here is that the two percentages represent different populations. There were 24% who said the decision should not be left up to the woman. These are likely a portion of the group that said abortion takes a human life. There were 26% that don't think abortion takes a human life. These are likely a portion of the group that thought the abortion decision should be left up to the woman. So, something like 45% of the public appears to hold the contradictory views. That's sad, but it's not the case that the vast majority of people hold both views. At least this poll doesn't show that.

And the two groups aren't homogenous as the press release suggests. 21% said they mostly agreed that the decision should be left up to the woman. Why the hesitancy? You'll never know, at least not from this poll. 20 % mostly agree that abortion is the taking of human life. Why the guarded response? The poll can't tell you.

Interesting poll about how people feel and think about abortion. Somewhat more interesting when you get the numbers clear.

Now throw the whole thing out.

If you look at the poll, you'll see no reference to the different times people get abortions, different abortion procedures, and you'll see only hints of different reasons (using abortion for birth control is mentioned).

As I've suggested in the past, if we don't differentiate the public's opinion of different abortion procedures involving fetuses of different ages done for various reasons, we really don't have the public's opinion at all.

And since many don't have an accurate conception of abortion, we can't be sure of what people actually think about real abortions from a poll that asks them about their current opinions.

Once again, the real value of a poll is to get people talking. It raises more questions than it answers. This poll makes me want to go out and ask people a lot of questions about their opinions about abortion. I'll be doing just that when the Justice For All Exhibit comes to the University of Central Oklahoma next week.

There's a big difference between polls and dialogue. Polls ask sound bite questions and get sound bite answers. There's no chance for respondents to explain or nuance their answers. That's why you should use poll results to start the conversation, rather than to tell you what people think. When you ask people lots of "What did you mean by...?" and "Why do you believe that...?" questions, that's how you really get to know them.

If you rely on polls for that, you'll be left guessing.

Comments

[Agilius]

>There's no chance for respondents to explain or nuance their answers.

This is such a great point; And it is applicable to other so-called scientific studies.

This is exacly the problem with "Myers-Briggs"-esque tests. I was given one of these tests by a Singles Pastor so as to discern what my Spritual Gift(s) were. Amused, I took the test knowing full well that it couldn't tell me *anything* about my Spiritual Gift(s), and found out I was right about what the test would say was my preferred Gift(s).

[Joseph M. Gates]

I believe that taking a polls can and has been very misleading when it comes to public opinion. Sad to say I believe there is the largest segment of our culture that relies on the majority of public opinion taken from polls instead of thinking for themselves. I agree that time should be given to the individual to explain why they answered the question the way they did so that we can get to know them better and why they think the way they do. I took a statistics class in undergrad years ago and I found out that depending on how you frame the central hypothesis, you can create data just about any way you want to. All that matters is how you asked the question, the words you actually use, and the reality that you do not allow any further discussion about the question by press time to other questions. As for me I never answer a poll over the telephone and I never answer one when I'm approached in a shopping mall or at a carnival or circus. Some polls are so structured and designed to come up with the correct answer that the poster was looking for. I would want a serious pollster to present what he's after and what he's searching for in terms of his hypothesis or his knull hypothesis.

[Santiago]

"It's some sort of weird self-fulfilling prophecy."

It's called propaganda. The intent to influence public opinion through deception is quite intentional.