Please join me, if you will, on a quick jaunt through the insanity of trying to track down the data behind a poorly sourced article in the news.
This article, published during the weekend, caught my eye: it claims that a 2017 study found that 70% of Americans think women should change their names when they marry, and half say it should be required
But the stat isn't from that 2017 study! Instead, it dates back to a paper presented in 2009. Here's USA Today from that year: usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/20…
So to recap, we have a new news article citing a 2-year old study-citing a 10-year-old-study citing a 13-year-old survey that uses an agree/disagree scale and that notably, doesn't appear to have any "unsure" options.
Anyways, these are also both older surveys, but it's worth noting that if you give people the option to say that women should do whatever they want, a plurality will take it.
The moral is, 93.1% of the time, it pays to beware of random, out-of-context statistics.
PS: At least this time, there's a legit, if dated, survey at the bottom of the rabbit hole! That is....not always the case.
PPS: Apologies for the million or so minor typos festooned throughout this thread.
PPPS: As a special bonus, here's another outlet running with the original news article but conflating the two stats and claiming that 70% say it should be legally required.
PPPPS (oy): Since I'm here extolling the virtues of precision - when I said there's not an "unsure" on the survey, that's correct, but more salient point is no neutral option.
Which also isn't inherently wrong, but as the other polls show, you get pretty different results w/ one
Whether people are willing to tell strangers their vaccine status over the phone is actually one of the things that we have an excellent way of testing -- there's CDC data to compare it to!
So far, many public polls tracking this look pretty accurate.
None of this is to say that election polling doesn't have ongoing issues, or even that polling around vaccines/mandates isn't subject to them (there are some less rosy assessments out there as well). But this is really one of the *more* directly measurable questions out there.
no better way to realize that you are an Old than the sinking feeling of looking through 2008 polling and realizing that it really was an entirely different political era
Also, this: "[T]he problem isn’t really polling. Rather, it’s the use of polls to center everything that happens in politics around those November 2022 swing voters in Wisconsin."
The subset of political actions that are going to meaningfully affect an election is both small and often unknowable, and yet that often becomes the primary lens through which those actions are examined, even in cases where there are other large, knowable effects.