shitake
...lly chosen so that each person in the population will have a measurable chance of selection” (AAPOR, p.2). By obtaining a representative sample, the pollster helps to ensure that the results of the poll “can be reliably projected form the sample to the larger population with known levels of certainty or precision” (AAPOR, p 2). In order to further solidify accurate results it is important for the interviewer to be properly trained on what types of techniques serve as most beneficial based on the chosen sample and the survey topic. Interviewers should be trained on making favorable initial contacts, dealing with reluctant respondents, and to avoid influencing the responses (APPOR). Interviewers should also be trained in the “survey concepts, definitions, and procedures, including a question-by-question approach to be sure that interviewers can deal with any misunderstandings that may arise” (APPOR, p. 3). According to APPOR the appropriate statistical analytic and reporting techniques for data require that results of the data are reported clearly, fully, fairly and unambiguously. In addition, sampling errors should be included for all statistics presented “including those that may seem contradictory or unfavorable” as well as a description of weighting, and respondent bias (AAPOR, p.5). EXAMPLES OF UNETHICAL POLLING Unfortunately despite these codes of ethics and standards of methods of practice, pollsters still perform unethical polling. Not only does unethical polling violate the AAPOR code of ethics but it also creates a situation of mistrust between pollsters and the public as well as a misrepresentation of public opinion. Examples of unethical polling have been found in practices such as push polls, and polls conducted by pollsters John Zogby and Frank Luntz. Push Polling Push polling is defined as “masquerading a legitimate political polling” but essentially “they are political telemarketing” (Fox, 1997, p. 4). Push polling occurs when potential voters are contacted by phone “feeding them false or misleading information about a candidate under the pretense of taking a poll to see how this information affects voter preferences. So called push polls are not polls at all (Asher, 2001, p. 130). Push polls “essentially coin their name due to the fact that they end up pushing potential voter support away from one candidate to another, essentially dissolving or weakening a political opponents campaign in the name of legitimate public opinion” (Asher, 2001, p. 130). For instance, an interviewer may place a call and start by asking if the respondent is planning on voting in the upcoming election. If the respondent is a potential voter, the interviewer would continue the push poll with a question such as “would you vote be affected if you knew that candidate X was previously convicted drunk driving?” Once the respondent replied, the caller would thank you for your time and hang up. This is where the gray area in push polling begins. The caller didn’t specifically say that the candidate was convicted of drunk driving; however a negative impression of the candidate was left on the potential voter. As push polls are not legitimate polls there are several differences to be noted between legitimate p...