tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6056742309267331706.post5923564413076758303..comments2023-09-23T08:31:22.652-04:00Comments on Real Numbers and Other Musings: Question Wording MattersPatrick Murrayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17397361447913248630noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6056742309267331706.post-3188860101524071242010-07-05T09:34:54.344-04:002010-07-05T09:34:54.344-04:00:o:oAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6056742309267331706.post-76784319309099113162009-02-19T15:22:00.000-05:002009-02-19T15:22:00.000-05:00Anon, you are spot on about the sample size. That ...Anon, you are spot on about the sample size. That is why I was cautious in portraying the results of this poll as "divided" opinion in the original release. If this were a candidate horserace poll, I would have said, the "lead" is within the survey's margin of error, which is what I think you are driving at.Patrick Murrayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17397361447913248630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6056742309267331706.post-68515538106469288542009-02-19T15:01:00.000-05:002009-02-19T15:01:00.000-05:00Perhaps we should also pay attention to sample siz...Perhaps we should also pay attention to sample size and, in turn, margin of error. At your n=402 with a reported 4.9% margin of error, your “in favor” ranges from 43.1% to 52.9%, and your “opposed” ranges from 38.1% to 47.9%.<BR/><BR/>That kind of overlap sort of strains the definition of statistically significant, and makes it a bit difficult to draw any real conclusion. On one hand, you're Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com