POLLSTERS FINDINGS ABOVE REPROACH.

Poll opinions for predicting results few months or weeks to major elections have been very popular since the 1940s. Admittedly, errors have been committed leading to false predictions. For instance, errors have occurred mainly due to sample procedures where pollsters, for reasons of economy or expediency, sometimes make compromises with rigorous statistical requirements.

But it also true that within this time span, techniques of public opinion research and polling have tremendously improved. Efforts have been made (and are still being made) to eliminate bias in selection of respondents, to improve the quality of questionnaires, and to train able and reliable interviewers. Leading social scientists such as Richard Lau have provided important milestones in the sampling methodology that have led to immense success in polling.

With such great strides in social science research, it is unlikely that a pollster can engage in any professional malpractice without being discovered and shamed. However, in the event that one doubts poll findings, the only way to confirm the objectivity of such findings is to engage in a similar research exercise. Intersubjectivity comes in handy. This entails the sharing of observations and factual information among social scientists. But relying on an unprofessional and mundane source such as a poll opinion (conducted in a matter of minutes) by a news anchor to dispute the findings of professional pollsters is a complete mockery of the scientific research process.

To begin with, unlike interviewers in the field, the news anchor has no way of telling whether those polling are registered voters or not. Secondly, only those people who are economically advantaged as to own a mobile phone (that is loaded with airtime) and a television set qualify to give an opinion. This means that economically empowered people would be overrepresented in such an exercise. In other words registered voters who are poor but who are likely to vote in the forthcoming referendum would be underrepresented in the so called “opinion poll over opinion polls” carried out by the said news anchors. Such shortcomings are easily overcome by trained interviewers out in the field.

From the foregoing, I find the allegations leveled against the leading Kenyan pollsters by the opponents of the proposed constitution quite preposterous. Such unfortunate claims attributed to some naysayers are a manifestation of a defeatist attitude and are at best pure sensationalism whose intent is to divide the Kenyan people into two hostile camps.

TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis