In detailing some of the evidence against Strategic Vision LLC, a pollster I am now almost certain is disreputable and fraudulent, I pointed in particular to a poll that they conducted on behalf of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, an conservative-leaning educational thinktank. The poll purported to show that Oklahoma's high school citizens were deficient in some of the most basic aspects of citizenship. Only 23 percent of them knew that George Washington was the first president, the poll claimed! Just 43 percent knew that the Democrats and Republicans are the two major political parties!
These conclusions seemed dubious to me on their face. Several years ago, at my old consulting job, I participated in a project for the State of Ohio's public schools which involved sitting down in a third or fifth grade classroom for the better part of a day and seeing how the students were learning. Most of these observations took place in poor, post-industrial towns, which were still suffering the effects of the steel mill or the axle plant that had long ago left town. What struck me, most of all, was how smart the kids were, relative to my expectations. These kids might not have been the highest achievers -- but I'm pretty sure that more than 90 percent of them would have known who George Washington was. And these were third and fifth graders.
There were other hints too, that Strategic Vision's poll may have been fake. The scores that Strategic Vision claimed the kids had gotten, for instance, were strangely underdispersed. And they seemed to contradict results from Oklahoma's own standardized testing, which asked much more difficult citizenship questions and found most of the students doing just fine.
It turns out that I was not the only person who had doubts about the survey. So did Ed Cannaday, the State Representative from Oklahoma's 15 House District.
In a telephone interview yesterday, Cannaday told me he was shocked when he heard of the results, which had received widespread media attention. "When I saw the statistics, I was just flabbergasted and said it cannot be true," he told me.
There were two items in particular that sent up warning flags for him: the one claiming that only 23 percent of the students knew the identity of George Washington, and another that claimed that about one in every ten students had listed the two major political parties as "Republican and Communist".
"Given the dialog of today, if they had said Republican and socialist, then maybe," Cannaday told me. "But communist -- that's just not something that you throw out there any more. I don't think Sarah Palin even used that term."
Cannaday, age 69, would be in a position to know. Before entering the State Legislature three years ago, he had spent decades in education, first as a teacher in a large public school in Kenosha, Wisconsin, and then in Oklahoma where he set up an alternative school. After a stint in private business, Cannaday returned to classroom, first as a teacher and then as a principal, and then -- finding he missed the one-on-one interaction with his students -- as a teaching principal at a small school in House District 15. He now serves on the House's education committee in Oklahoma City, and continues to pay regular visits to the schools in his district. "Most schools like to have me once a month," he says, to talk about legislation pending before the state.
Cannaday therefore had little difficulty setting up an experiment: he arranged to have all the seniors in the 10 secondary schools in his district take the Strategic Vision/OCPA survey. Cannaday tried to replicate the Strategic Vision survey to the greatest extent possible. The same exact questions were used, and as in the case of the original survey, the answers were open-ended rather than multiple choice. The survey was administered to a total of 325 seniors, including special education students.
Cannaday's survey however, found his students doing just fine: They answered an average of 7.8 out of the 10 questions correctly. By comparison, the high school students that were purportedly surveyed by Strategic Vision had gotten just 2.8 out of the items correct. 98 percent of the students on Cannaday's survey -- not 23 percent -- knew that George Washington was the first President. 81 percent -- not 14 percent -- knew that Thomas Jefferson had written the Declaration of Independence. 95 percent -- not 43 percent -- knew that the Democrats and Republicans are the major political parties. There was just no comparison between the two.
Cannaday distributed his results via e-mail to the constituents on his mailing list, including Karina Henderson, who published his findings in a dairy at Daily Kos. He also sent hard copies to each of the schools in his district, as well as all of Oklahoma's state legislators. The reaction so far has been entirely positive -- "even from the Republicans," said Cannaday, a Democrat.
Cannaday also sent his results to OCPA, the thinktank that had commissioned the survey, but has yet to receive a response. In October, before the results of Cannaday's survey had surfaced, OCPA had told the Oklahoma Gazzette that they were taking "a closer look at the raw data and the methodology,” behind the Strategic Vision survey but were not yet ready to "toss out" the results.
House District 15 is generally quite representative of Oklahoma, especially its Eastern portion, but is somewhat poorer than the state as a whole. "Rural" was the first adjective that came to mind when I asked Cannaday to describe his district -- no town has more than 3,000 people. Most of the residents make their living in the natural gas industry, commute to service-sector jobs in the comparatively large towns of Muskogee, Oklahoma or Fort Smith, Arkansas, or are engaged in what Cannaday calls "cow/calf operations". The five counties that make up the district range from middle-class to impoverished. Haskell County, for instance, where the town of Stigler is located, has one of the highest unemployment rates in the state and one of the largest proportions of its students on free and reduced lunch programs, the preferred benchmark of socioeconomic status in public education. House District 15 has no private schools.
Cannaday is proud of the achievements of his students -- particularly their low drop-out rate, which is about five percent, and their success in the state's mock trial tournaments, where they've frequently finished in the top 5 in the state competing against much larger schools. He has seen his students become doctors, attorneys, optometrists and accountants, he told me. "Any time you can have one of your former students in your district who's on speed dial in Oklahoma City as a physician, that's not too bad," he said.
But the schools in House District 15, which sends 40-50 percent of its students to college and sees 20-25 percent compete it -- are not exceptional in any obvious way. The students at Haskell High School, for instance, received below-average scores in 5 of the 7 categories tested by Oklahoma's standard exam, including in U.S. History.
There is no reason to think, in other words, that the students in House District 15 should have gotten such profoundly superior results to the "students" in Strategic Vision's survey. Nor could Strategic Vision's results have been the result of any sort of mathematical or methodological oddity. Consider their claim that literally none of the 1,000 students they surveyed were able to answer more than 7 of the 10 questions correctly -- lower than the average score achieved in Cannaday's test.
There are, rather, only two possibilities. Either the Strategic Vision survey was entirely fabricated -- or Cannaday's was.
I would put every dollar to my name on Cannaday, who has kept the surveys and is happy to show them to them to anyone who comes asking.
Next week is Celebrate Freedom Week in Oklahoma, with public schools students to be taught from a special curriculum highlighting the Declaration of Independence. "If were going to be pass education reform then we need to be out in the classroom demonstrating it," Cannaday said of his fellow legislators. "I will be in a classroom Friday," he told me. "I enjoy it."
I e-mailed to David E. Johnson, the CEO of Strategic Vision, a draft of this article and asked for any comments. The entirety of his comments were as follows:
"Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Our company did survey the Oklahoma students grades 9-12 for the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs. Our client has all of the raw data, cross tabs, methodology from the survey."
Johnson did not reply to a second e-mail asking for his interpretation of the substantial difference between his results and those found by Cannaday.
11.08.2009
Real Oklahoma Students Ace Citizenship Exam; Strategic Vision Survey Was Likely Fabricated
by Nate Silver @ 7:30 AM...see also education, oklahoma, strategic vision
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

151 comments
I have never commented here before, though your analysis of the 08 election was as clear and thorough as any I've ever seen.
But man, I just have to say that I have never seen such a brutal and efficient smackdown of an entire firm as these posts about Strategic Vision. This one is really the cherry on top of the killer cake, too.
Seriously, really top-notch.
Check and mate.
*applauds*
So one difference was apparently that Canaday only surveyed seniors, while SV surveyed students from grades 9 through 12.
That makes the studies a little less comparable, although the discrepancy is of course so enormous that this is, indeed, a strong further indication that SV may not quite have been honest. Even when we assume that only seniors know these things, it is still virtually impossible that SV did not poll any senior who knew at least something.
Silver's arm must be getting tired from beating this very dead horse.
He said himself they've stopped polling.
Nate thanks again for taking this on - quite a bit of negative publicity for Oklahoma from all the cables. Have you asked OCPA for the raw data, cross tabs and methodology from the survey? I live in OKC if you need help.
Even as bad as the SV "poll" was, the Republican Congressmen at the Bachmann/teabagger rally the other day were 0 for 2 on the Pledge of Allegiance and the Preamble to the Constitution!
game, set, match
Nate Silver Facts:
1. Nate Silver and Strategic Vision once went into an all-out cage fight. Guess which one walked out of it alive.
2. When Nate Silver analyzes polls, he doesn't look for the best one, pollsters come to him in hopes of not being brutally beaten like Strategic Vision.
3. Nate Silver doesn't feel sorry for Strategic Vision, because he knows that owner Darrell Edwards will tell his grand children of the day he was acknowledged by Five-Thirty-Eight.
4. Nate Silver can shoot from the hip and still get a head shot. Just see what he did to Strategic Vision.
@Partisan
Nate is flogging a company that has fabricated its data. And that is a crime worth flogging for.
Undersampling/over representing is one thing. Fabrication an all together different beast.
@Partisan,
Actually, this isn't a dead horse. It does not matter if Strategic Vision has stopped polling. If they took money for work that they did not do, that is considered fraud in most locales. It will be up to their clients to sue, if they so choose.
The other issue is, as it has been pointed out, that they can return to polling once the dust has settled. Which means that they would be free to commit fraud again.
What is more, this survey was used to advance an agenda in order to destroy the public school system. It is part of an agenda that comes from those with a strong distrust of the government. Thus, if this is fraudulent, then it was a fraud committed against the nation as a whole.
It is time for the people who claim to be about law, truth, justice and order to actually take the consequences of their actions, or,for that matter, for there to be consequences to their actions.
Nate,
Something that would be interesting to help people understand statistic better is if you were to repeat some of the analysis that you did on the strategic vision data. In particular, I think it would be instructive to show how your two dispersion models with all identical students vs. groups of average, strong, and weak students.
I bet Strategic Vision did send over the "raw data". It was that or give the money back, and I imagine it's long spent, and not on conducting any poll.
The client may wish to have the data analyzed before making a decision about legal action (or at least getting a refund.) The data may look good enough to fool the layman, but not those in the know.
And this IS NOT beating a dead horse, it's taking the pulse of a fallen man and declaring, "Yep, he's dead alright."
I hope anyone that paid them for polling ask some serious questions (and try to get their money back.) If they can't, this could wind up as a federal fraud case.
@ All the people saying this is a dead horse
No. Not at all. This is Nate Silver delivering a fatal blow, going over to the dead body, and choking it for good measures.
Bravo Nate!
Hope Cannaday's survey gets as much attention as SV's origninal "poll".
Nate, thanks so much.
There is so much bad information fed to people via a parroting, sloppy MSM, your informed challenge to pollsters, especially this extreme case, was sorely needed and has been greatly helpful to our democracy.
Whether we like it or not, polls are mini-elections, telling us what people outside our circle of contacts are thinking, and polls influence policy debates.
To this end, it is extremely important polls are done reliably, transparent, and credibly. And Nate, you have done wonders to that end.
Now the remaining problem is that any poll "babies" that run counter insider positions or MSM groupthink will likely be cast out with the SV dirty bathwater. Now you will hear all polls are unreliable, if public sentiment runs counter to entrenched powers. But one step at a time.
Nate, kudos both for your skepticism of SV methods but also for being informed and engaged with real experience (interacting with school kids) that gave you additional information for your evaluation.
Too often it seems critics and skeptics can come from very narrow places, and while being insightful about certain holes in logic/data, lack a whole understanding that can lead more global truth-finding. Your openness with "others" and, it seems, a healthy curiosity, have made your skeptcism much more effective.
Thanks again.
Proof reading the typos would make this a serius article. Right now I am going to the Daily Kos to get my milk because of the organic dairy.
Wow, loved the Chuck-Norris-Style facts in a previous post.
I don't think Nate's beating a dead horse here. Settling the Oklahoma discrepency and administering a coup de grace were not overkill, but vindication. It's what we Marines call 'mopping up'...
Nate, spelling errors. Search the text for 'air' and you'll find two instances where you were suckered by spell check. 'Dairy' instead of diary and one other. People are going to quote you and you don't want to leave any cracks in the armor.
Semper Fi,
Terry
Thanks I remember thinking this poll didn't make any sense when it was posted on dailykos, and I didn't even notice it was Strategic Vision. It was apparently an open-ended test, but all the responses came back really neat and tidy.
Unfortunately, there is a second, equally important question, which this web site would not have the resources to investigate.
WHY did SV fabricate results, always in a "conservative" direction?
The most innocent possible answer is that they entirely independently wanted to present their now-horrified clients with those results.
An alternate possibility, which of course I can only note, and cannot rule in or out, is that at least some of their clients communicated, whether overtly or in mutually understood implications, that they, the clients, wanted the polls to come out a certain way.
I'll note that the right wing response to Nate's straightforward critiques of SV, on this blog, has always been to 1) aggressively defend SV and 2) dismiss the critique as an irrelevant "dead horse" once the data got too hard to deny.
Yet if SV was a purely independent actor, it is the very right wing clients who employed them who were defrauded - provided with cooked data when they ordered a neutral poll.
So why would right wingers be so eager to defend or dismiss SV...?
Just out of curiosity, what were the average inter-item correlations in the real data? They were 0.02 in the SV report. Real results would be expected to be more like 0.2.
Another way to ask the question is: what was the standard deviation of the total scores? The correlation can be extracted from that.
@STepper-
I'm sorry, but attacking someone on typos, grammar, and word choice is the cheapest way of attempting to dismiss their points.
I, for one, am dyslexic/dysgraphic. I also am working on an MA in History and Mythology, and have an IQ which ranges all over the place, even into the 170 range, if broken down by subject. I routinely make typos and misspellings. I try to correct them.
Going after someone based upon typos or other errors of mechanics is like me saying that your points are invalid because you cannot manage to write Stepper properly, or that your points are invalid because you're ugly.
If ISS man 71 is indeed posting from the International Space Station that tells something about Nate's reach.
Just about to say: "WOW!"
Personally, I'm opposed to beating horses under any circumstance. If it is absolutely unavoidable that a horse be beaten, it's best to choose one already dead.
I approve Nate's actions, while seconding Michael (mbw) request for inter-item correlationsr. But I'd like to retire the horse-beating metaphor.
FYI
Two think tanks that are clients of Strategic Vision also are seeking more details on the firm's methods in light of Silver's analysis. The Goldwater Institute, which calls itself a free-market think tank, and the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs hired Strategic Vision to test high-school students' civic knowledge in Arizona and Oklahoma, respectively.
After Silver questioned the Oklahoma results as being too bleak, both think tanks sought verification from Strategic Vision. "Although I find it very unlikely that Strategic Vision manufactured this data, I have asked for receipts from the marketing firm from which they purchased the contact data just to make certain," Matthew Ladner, vice president of research for Goldwater Institute, said.
Brandon Dutcher, vice president for policy for the Oklahoma group, isn't making up his mind just yet. "I have requested voluminous survey data from them, as well as answers to some methodological questions -- all of which I expect they can and will provide so that they can go about defending their firm and I can go about defending this survey," Dutcher said. "If not, however, then of course I would want my money back and wouldn't hire them again.
Speaking of dead horses, isn't SV, Inc. the polling firm that asked Oklahoma high school students the question "What was the color of Grant's grey mare?" and only 23% got the answer right?
I do think Nate is right on this one however...
In some states, like bordering Kansas, the public school government/civics is not offered until Jr or Sr year of HS. The first poll was of Sophomores (who may not have received a class on gov/civics yet) and the second was of Seniors (who likely would have had such a class).
The gap in differences of scores makes this explanation less likely, but it is something perhaps to keep in mind.
Man, ever since Neil Stevens posted that petulant RedState tirade on 9/28, he and they have been conspicuously silent on this issue. Anyone with a redstate commenter account care to ask for an update? Snarrrrrrrk.
Isn't there a possibility, since the original poll garnered a fair bit of attention, that the students in Oklahoma were aware of the poll and therefore aware of the correct answers?
"Cannaday distributed his results via e-mail to the constituents on his mailing list, including Karina Henderson, who published his findings in a dairy at Daily Kos."
I'm sure that you meant to say that Ms Henderson posted her findings diary at the well-know blog Daily Cows.
Left Coast Bernard
@LPC civics are often taught in waves, in several class levels, such as in 5th grade, 7th grade and 11th grade. Civics are not taught just once. Many high schools cover history, Am History, government in sophomore years.
Even if OK only teaches civics in senior year in high school, they then likely teach it also earlier in 7th, 8th grade...and if school kids are like me, they remember mest what they have been taught most recently...so 9th graders could be better on test than seniors depending on timing of civics teachin. Unless we know exactly when these OK students get there civics education, we can not conclude anything about age bias
Why?
That's the questions I have.
Did they falsify their results because of a request by someone?
Was someone trying to create a meme against public schools?
Or does Strategic Vision just not have the resource to conduct a legitimate poll, therefore relied on generating the results via a simple formula?
Nate sure knows how to twist the knife. I love it.
A couple of these questions are addressed deep in the comments of the Kos diary, but to clarify a couple of things...
Re: polling seniors vs 9-12: Oklahoma fifth-graders outperformed SV's "students" on questions much more difficult than these on their EOI tests. These students, whether in 9th or 12th, have already had strong exposure to at least these basics.
Re: Why would SV/OCPA want to promote such terrible and suspect results: There has been an ongoing Republican-led legislative fight to dismantle public schools and essentially create a charter school system instead. Pushing the notion that public schools are failing would help their misguided argument. I still don't doubt that certain GOP legislators will quote the SV results on the floor next session, sadly.
(Full disclosure: I work as the Communications Dir for the OK Democratic Party.)
Great smackdown Nate.
Still, even in the other survey isn't it sad and pathetic that barely more than 3/4 knew that the Constitution was the law of the land?
Really says something doesn't it.
And that's by no means a rebuke of Oklahoma, I'm sure those results would be widespread across the US
Ryan, "supreme law of the land" is a sufficiently esoteric phrasing that I would expect some folks to miss it, even if they could give you several sentences explaining what the Constitution is and what it does. Remember that this is a free-response question set.
Actually if you read the Constitution itself, Article VI says that the Constitution, all federal laws, AND all treaties signed "are the supreme law of the land."
So a really really smart student might get the answer "wrong" by knowing too much.
This is the so-called "Supremacy Clause" of the Constitution, and it was aimed against would-be nullifiers and states-rights proponents.
I wonder what the point of their fabrication was. Was it to "prove" that public schools can't do the job, so we should get rid of public education and replace it with bible-school or something?
I also don't know what kids are taught today. When I was in public elementary school back in the 60's we had to write essays on George Washington and Thomas Jefferson on their birthdays.
Also one on Columbus and one on Lincoln. There was no way anybody in our school could avoid knowing who these people were after the 3rd grade because you had to copy out your essays in long-hand neatly on lined white paper after you completed them, handed them in and had the teacher approve the pencil draft essay on yellow paper.
Penmanship counted towards your grade and you had to do it over if your hand-writing was too sloppy. By the time I was finished I was totally sick of George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson and wished Abraham Lincoln had never been born too, but at least I knew who they were!
I suppose they don't do that nowadays. But, probably nobody in our school would have failed that test anytime after 4th or 5th grade.
Boom goes the dynamite! That's about it for that.
Great job, Nate. I'm glad you stayed on top of this, and I hope you give us any further updates, such as if SV clients begin requesting refunds.
First, for all those who are trying to paint this in a liberal vs republican framework, please stop. As a liberal, this has nothing to do with party-lines this has to do with it being outright fraud--a major violation of basic integrity. If anything republican groups should be the ones primarily in arms over this issue as they were primarily the defrauded parties. I know often in the age of 24 hour partisan news channels people only focus on the unethical behavior of the other side of the aisle, but the actions of isolated individuals committing fraud doesn't translate to their entire side of the political spectrum. [It could easily be a shady left-leaning pollster for the next major polling fraud case, if there is one.]
Second, for those arguing that this could maybe be accounted for through a difference in the groups surveyed, come on (recent poll was just seniors original poll supposedly grades 9-12). Look at the data yet again. The average senior who in the updated poll must have been polled near the beginning of the school year (between Sept-Nov), so if anything should do worse if you suppose this sort of stuff was taught in a senior year class. But then again looking at the questions again, these are subjects that most people don't pick up in high school and actually learned at a much younger age (or from watching/reading various media).
No test-taker in the S.V. poll answered more than 7 questions correctly, while the average senior in this poll answered 8 questions correctly (the only two with major difficulty seem to be # of SC justices, and length of US Senators terms, which is what you would expect from reading the questions). The SV survey showed that there was no substantiative difference between test takers--if you took the overall score (e.g., 28% know question1) and each question and ran Monte Carlo simulations (that is treat each question by each taker as an independent event like rolling a dice that is only right 28% of the time on question1), you get the same break down of total scores as the SV survey did (that makes it extremely unlikely for anyone to score better than 7 with SV raw numbers). If you suppose that seniors do much better than everyone else, then this would not happen at all.
Even if grades 9 to 11 performed much worse than seniors, there still should have been ~250 seniors polled by SV. Therefore, for there to be an average of 7.8 for seniors (as the recent poll shows), you should expect about 125 of them to have gotten 8 or more correct. [You could get a little less than 125, say 70 could get perfect scores (10) and 180 get 7s then the mean could be 7.8, but then again this also wouldn't jive with SVs results at all. Also you more realistically will expect to see more than 125 above the mean as a single low score by a severely special needs student would tilt the mean downwards.] There is no way you can redistribute the data or explain this as random variations.
Careers deserve to be ruined over this major lapse of integrity.
Can the state government demand their money back? If the state threatened a lawsuit the added damage to the Strategic Vision name would be enough incentive to fork over the dough.
The state government did not pay them, (OCPA is a think tank).
Although the Oklahoma public school system ultimately suffered because of their fraudulent rebuke of high school students, I don't think libel against a government institution can be a tort (on the same grounds as seditious libel cannot be a crime). I may be wrong on that though.
Good job disproving it, but once something like this is released, it is going to survive for dozens of years as a piece of "wisdom".
And it will go down to prove the "Saturday Night Live syndrome" answer that our public schools are always in a state of great decay, and students are dumber than ever. Alternatively, coastal people will use it to prove that people in the interior are stupid.
James…
So why aren’t Republicans “up-in-arms” over finding out that SV’s polls were phony? Because they had no interest in true and accurate polls. What they wanted was a “polling” outfit that could produce numbers that supported their points of view.
SV’s sole function was filling out the spin. As long as no one exposed them as phony they were a reliable source of validation for the crap the GOP PR machinery is always spitting out. So for a while SV was very useful, and the GOP got their money’s worth. But now that they’ve been busted the GOP will simply have to look elsewhere for cooked up “poll” numbers.
Possible next cool outcome:
Someone sues SV LLC for a refund and some punitive damages.
Those damages are set up (maybe by the AAPOR) to fund further investigations into polling data accountability of other pollsters. I'm sure I don't need to suggest who those pollsters might be to anyone on this site.
David Johnson may have at one time wanted to be a media darling. I bet he sure wishes he could fade into obscurity in the Appalachian foothills now.
Thank you Karina for the clarification on the possible motives for wanting skewed data. Keep up the good fight.
Excellent WSJ article courtesy of loner
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/polling-controversy-raises-questions-of-disclosure-805/
Markdash,
If OK students are politically "with it" enough to know about controversial education surveys, then they are "with it" enough to know who George Washington is.
Ryan,
I'm not so surprised about the constitution question. Even someone who knows what the constitution is and what its significance is might be a little thrown by a question as open ended sounding as "what is the supreme law of the land."
As long as no one exposed them as phony they were a reliable source of validation for the crap...
This is my previously stated '4 out of 5 dentists prefer' argument. If you accept that this statement is valid on it's face then it must be true. But if you say, "Really? How many dentists? Were they ADA certified?, Who asked the questions?" and all you get is crickets, then you have to call that statement into question. Just because somebody on TV says so doesn't necessarily mean it's true.
Even someone who knows what the constitution is and what its significance is might be a little thrown by a question as open ended sounding as "what is the supreme law of the land."
I would expect a lot of responses to that question (Particularly in OK) to be the Bible.
The only question remaining is "Who will the fill the demand for fraudulent polling services now that SV LLC is discredited?".
There will always be those who need to "prove" something with a poll that is not actually true. Somebody will step up to the plate and take those people's money.
Nate - I was wondering if there is any kind of certifcation for polling and surveys like what is done in most trade associations? With your excellent analysis of Strategic Vision's shoddy work it makes me think there should be! I can't also help but wonder if there might not be a political bias at work here or that the company never conducted the polling they said they did but just made up numbers to support their political point of view. If that's the case I wonder how many times in the past the Media has bitten at one of these phony polls and protrayed them as truth?
I can hear the mouse from across the street because of the silence from the right-tards.
The ones who were loudly defending SV, the ones frothing at the mouth screaming at Nate, saying that he is going down for this and were giddy at the prospect. They know who they are and their silence condemns them.
So is Strategic Vision part of the GOP misinformation machine, or are they a bunch of con artists taking advantage of the gullible folks over on the right?
@dre: This is in part what AAPOR tries to do, establishing standards and practices and, when necessary, investigating particular cases. In fact, it was an AAPOR initiative resulting from the failure of polling in last year's New Hampshire Primary that led to censure of Strategic Vision, Inc., which ultimately stimulated Nate's further investigation and the imputation of fraud by SV Inc.
Pollster.com's Mark Blumenthal has also written extensively on this matter, and has entertained the idea of giving actual scores or ratings to individual pollsters (not possible to do on a poll by poll basis). I wish he would follow up with this idea.
Of course that polling was a fabrication. Even Steve and Doug Butabi new the Presidents on the money when they were trying to bribe their way past Michael Clarke Duncan.
Well, that's not what a good friend of mine told me. Maybe you know him? His name is A-bra-ham. .... You don't know him?
How 'bout his two friends? George Washington and... George Washington?
So this is related to the previous post. Apologies.
A fantasy scenario:
Health Care bill passed by essentially two votes. One of those two votes was Republican Cao from Louisiana. So I think you could make an argument that the loss of NY-23 was a bigger blow to the Republicans than originally thought. Thanks Sarah Palin, Rush, Glenn, et al. Because of you, I'll likely get health care soon.
@STepper
"Proof reading the typos would make this a serius article."
Sadly, proofreading your own typos would still not make your comment serious.
Looks like they went too far with their fabricated survey answers...their results were too absurd to be taken seriously. And not only that, the numbers don't even seem internally consistent...more students could name the Constitution as the "supreme law of the land" than could name George Washington as the first President? (The latter is something most second graders could probably tell you...the former, as has been pointed out in the comments, is vaguely worded enough that even intelligent students who are well aware of what the Constitution is might come up with something else.)
Nice catch and nice refutation. But about your headline: since when is 78 percent "acing" an exam? :-)
Thanks, Nate!
I appreciate having Oklahoma's name cleared. Our education may be drastically underfunded, but we're not nearly as dumb as we were portrayed. Thanks for laying the smackdown on some exceptionally unethical pollsters.
I'd like to "third" Michael (mbw)'s request for the equivalent analysis as in the SV post (or data about the total scores so we can repeat the analysis) and see what they say about the heterogeneity of students.
Harriet said...
But about your headline: since when is 78 percent "acing" an exam?
Did Nate state that 78% was the point where all the students 'aced' the exam?
No.
What Nate stated was that 78% of the students 'aced' the exam.
If forty students out of 100 scored a perfect score, then those forty students 'aced' the exam, and 60 didn't 'ace' the exam. Would a headline reading "Students ace exam" be incorrect? Maybe a bit misleading to some who don't read the rest of the text, but NOT incorrect.
The headline could have been written a bit more clearly, but it is in no way false, or inaccurate, as written.
Mike in Maryland
Fraudulent like the polls you declared so obviously iffy in New Jersey in Virginia that turned out to be startlingly accurate?
Nate Silver is a liberal hack, plain and simple.
@tim
The accuracy of SV polls relative to others was never in question, as you may well know. In fact it was a fine predictor in the Presidential race.
But they are almost certainly fabricating at least some results, something which was never suspected of polling in VA or NJ (or even in NY-23, which turned out to be largely inaccurate).
If you don't understand the meaning of words like "fraudulent," you should ask or look them up, rather than making ridiculous assertions based on your misperceptions.
@Mr. Universe:
Fair enough point. But who's to say Scozzafava would have voted against health care? Based on her voting record I'd say it was no better than 50/50. I'm still glad the conservatives took the chance.
I don't understand why anyone would purposely fake test results proving students in their state are DUMBER than average! Maybe all this talk about wingnuts being proud of their lack of intelligence is actually true.
beavis said...
I can hear the mouse from across the street because of the silence from the right-tards.
The ones who were loudly defending SV, the ones frothing at the mouth screaming at Nate, saying that he is going down for this and were giddy at the prospect. They know who they are and their silence condemns them.
---------------------------
I hope you're not talking about the people who were saying Nate's work were shoddy. Since in the earlier posts it was. (do you notice a critical difference between this latest post and the previous ones???). It would be sad to think that you'd confuse that with defending SV. Although to be honest, I don't remember many people actually defending SV.
Though to be honest, it would have been good to test grades 9-12 instead of just 12 for comparison reasons, and to put up p-stats or the probability that the null hypothesis was correct (that is, SV wasn't fraudulent). Though doing the latter would probably wear out Nate's 0 key.
@Matt
The idea was for OCPA to prove that public schools were failing Oklahoma students in order to galvanize support for private school vouchers and a larger charter schools system.
Not to say that OCPA had a hand in the deception, but that's perhaps why SV gave them results that made public schools look bad.
Good post, now lets move on.
"Cannaday distributed his results via e-mail to the constituents on his mailing list, including Karina Henderson, who published his findings in a dairy at Daily Kos"
That's milking it for all it's worth!
Let the record show, 538's usual group of conservative yahoo winger, disingenuous, spinning sour grape, sore loser, totally negative party of no! trolls are conspicuous by their absence in the last (2) threads ~ the U.S. House of Representatives passing health care reform! and SV being a total fraud!
carry on
Like many of your other commenters, I'd like to suggest that you repeat your original analysis with the new data. On it's own, the original analysis was quite compelling, but it'd still be interesting to know, in practice, how much correlation you actually get between answer (perhaps Ed could provide you with the original surveys)
They have 10 schools for 325 seniors?
There's something wrong right there. Those kids are going thru their whole public school career in a class of only 30 or so individuals.
That's gotta be a source of narrow perspective.
@Pragmatus:
So why aren’t Republicans “up-in-arms” over finding out that SV’s polls were phony? Because they had no interest in true and accurate polls. What they wanted was a “polling” outfit that could produce numbers that supported their points of view.
First, I know many intelligent republicans who have integrity, they just have a different set of political viewpoints from me. To assume that all republicans want phony data is preposterous. Now there's a possibility a few republican organizations knew they were paying for phony data, but I doubt it (why pay tens of thousands of dollars for phony data? It would be better to conduct a legitimate poll but just choose the phrasing in a manner that can get the results you want). The thing with SV is that there polls seemed believable (other than the OK education survey where they just seemed to get very lazy)--their results were roughly accurate in tracking most elections, because they (presumably) faked the data to be similar to other (legitimate) polls.
Second, for other sites not being up in arms over it, Nate runs the most intelligent political site for analyzing statistics that I know of. I do not know a republican/right-wing analogue of this site, where Monte Carlo simulations are frequently done to prove a point. The fact of the matter is, I can't think of a single other political site (liberal or republican) that could have broken this kind of story. So that's why I say the republicans don't seem to be that up in arms over it. Also while even many here are clamoring that Nate is beating a dead horse, this is his story, his original investigative journalism/data analysis, so he has to stay on it to keep the story there.
I consider this analogous to finding a student cheating in my class. Regardless to whether I genuinely liked or disliked the student, I have a responsibility to the integrity of the institution that I work for to have them at least fail the class and/or get expelled from the university. This is not always done and one must be very careful over these allegations, but lack of integrity is very troubling.
As a scientist, faking data is the biggest professional sin you can commit as you waste the time and money of hundreds of other scientists (who follow you down false routes) and if it becomes pervasive enough undermines all of collaborative science (as no one would trust anyone else result without checking it first). Fake a scientific result is the moral equivalent of going into a bank and robbing the bank of (hundreds of) millions of taxpayer dollars, plus wasting many people's productive time.
Great stuff Nate, thanks!
For those who don't know, there's a very good reason the scores on surveys like this are so low:
You get a bunch of high school students in a room and you tell them "Ok, you're going to take this test. IT DOESN'T COUNT FOR YOUR GRADE. You can leave when you're done."
Guess what happens? Students fill out the test as quickly as possible without even reading the questions or answers just so they can leave.
Robert said...
They have 10 schools for 325 seniors?
There's something wrong right there. Those kids are going thru their whole public school career in a class of only 30 or so individuals.
No town larger than 3000. :) My Grade 12 class only had 6 students. Five went through the graduation ceremony (happened before finals, meaning they were in enough classes to get enough credits). Only 3 actually got diplomas.
Giving the Class Valedictorian speech wasn't such a hard gig to land. :)
That's gotta be a source of narrow perspective.
No less than the wider community you are living in.
Er Fanbusters,
Then why wouldn't that happen on Cannaday's survey?
Also it's hard to imagine that out of 1000 students, NO reasonably intelligent kid took it seriously...
And that the "joke answers" were somewhat uniform across schools...
And that almost everyone gave a few correct answers to different questions but then decided to f*** with the pollsters on other ones--not just a few students but ALL of them...
No matter how you spin it, it just doesn't add up.
James said…
“To assume that all republicans want phony data is preposterous.”
I didn’t make that assumption. My remark was about the Republicans who commissioned the poll data in question. Neither they nor any other Republican has expressed outrage over SV’s evidently scurrilous practices, so I simply drew the conclusion, and I think appropriately, that a true poll was not what was desired. The people commissioning these “polls” wanted crap of a particular flavor, and they got it. Otherwise I think they would have been upset once the truth of SV’s methodology came out. Yet there hasn’t been a peep.
Someone else will have to make the connection between the GOP adherents who relied on SV and all Republicans, because that was not my point.
(I would further suggest that SV was used rather than some demonstrably legitimate pollster because, with no real overhead, they probably could do the “work” much more cheaply.)
:o) :o) :o)
For those of you speculating as to the motivation for conducting such a poor poll, You may have missed Karina's comment earlier in the thread:
Re: Why would SV/OCPA want to promote such terrible and suspect results: There has been an ongoing Republican-led legislative fight to dismantle public schools and essentially create a charter school system instead. Pushing the notion that public schools are failing would help their misguided argument. I still don't doubt that certain GOP legislators will quote the SV results on the floor next session, sadly.
(Full disclosure: I work as the Communications Dir for the OK Democratic Party.)
Hope that provides some clarity for your conversation.
Since I am from Oklahoma, I thought I would look up OCPA's website...Under their mission statement: OCPA has been part of an emerging, national trend of conservative, state-based think tanks. The founders, led by Dr. David Brown, envisioned an organization that was capable of affecting the state’s public policy similar to national level think tanks, such as the Heritage Foundation.
It appears to be a conservative group.
They are still posting the "results" of the SV poll!
Link:
http://www.ocpathink.org/publications/perspective-archives/september-2009-volume-16-number-9/?module=perspective&id=2321
Excerpts:
"Last month OCPA commissioned a national research firm, Strategic Vision, to determine Oklahoma public high-school students' level of basic civic knowledge. The firm's surveys have been used by Time, Newsweek, and USA Today, and National Journal's "Hotline" has cited them as some of the most accurate in the country. The margin of error for this particular survey is plus/minus three percent...
Ten questions, chosen at random, were drawn from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) item bank...
After seeing the questions for yourself, you the reader can judge whether a 92 percent passing rate is a reasonable expectation for Oklahoma's high-school students. Unfortunately, Oklahoma high-school students scored alarmingly low on the test, passing at a rate of only 2.8 percent. That is not a misprint.
Wow. SV even made up a margin of error for their "poll."
Nate tha Great,
You should edit this "
There are, rather, only two possibilities. Either the Strategic Vision survey was entirely fabricated -- or Cannaday's was.
I would put every dollar to my name on Cannaday, who has kept the surveys and is happy to show them to them to anyone who comes asking"
as it is ambiguous. It's obvious from the context of the article and even the second half of the sentence that you would bet on Cannaday's survey being accurate but it could easily be taken out of context to imply that you think he is the one that fabricated things.
Alright Okie. The internet blog sleuthing continues. How do these guys think they can get away with making stuff up in this age of technology?
Mr. Universe (and Karina)…
This whole business of fake polling is just an extension of the fake science that has been sponsored by the GOP for quite some time, reaching something of an apotheosis during the Bush Administration. It is sickening to see—even diehard, racist Republicans of fifty years ago never stooped to generating the complexity of lies we see coming from the right these days. Government-sponsored science from 2001 to 2009 was beaten and trampled into little more than a handmaiden for industry. Whenever a particular business didn’t want to deal with trouble their products or practices stirred up, the government commissioned “scientists” to put together a study that either extolled what business was doing or at least cast doubt on there being any harm associated with it.
The result is that the American people, already amongst the more ignorant on earth about science, became even more so.
If we are ever going to achieve a positive outcome in terms of education in this country, these shenanigans have to stop. Unfortunately if the GOP is ever in control of government again the same old dismal slide will begin all over again. They are not interested in the future of the country—their only concern is that business always triumphs, the rest of us be damned.
Yes James that was a blanket condemnation of Republicans. Perhaps there are conscientious Republicans out there, but their party, from the top on down, is not interested in listening to them.
Nate...everybody in agriculture, anywhere in the country, describes a rancher who has a herd of cows that birth calves and then sells off the calves as having a "cow/calf operation." It's common nomenclature, not some quaint, folksy idiom from your Oklahoma legislator.
"There were two items in particular that sent up warning flags for him: the one claiming that only 23 percent of the students knew the identity of George Washington, and another that claimed that about one in every ten students had listed the two major political parties as "Republican and Communist".
"Given the dialog of today, if they had said Republican and socialist, then maybe," Cannaday told me. "But communist -- that's just not something that you throw out there any more. I don't think Sarah Palin even used that term.""
Hah! What I said when the poll first came out.
Don't be sure SV has "stopped polling". It's been 46 days since their last posted poll results. Here are the intervals between each poll result and the previous:
New Jersey Poll 09/24/09 1 days
Georgia Poll 09/23/09 28 days
Georgia Poll 08/26/09 35 days
New Jersey Poll 07/22/09 0 days
Georgia Poll 07/22/09 28 days
New Jersey Poll 06/24/09 7 days
Georgia Poll 06/17/09 13 days
Florida Poll 06/04/09 43 days
New Jersey Poll 04/22/09 0 days
Georgia Poll 04/22/09 69 days
Florida Poll - Part 2 02/12/09 1 days
Florida Poll - Part 1 02/11/09 100 days
Pennsylvania Poll 11/03/08 0 days
Washington Poll 11/03/08 0 days
Wisconsin Poll 11/03/08 0 days
Florida Poll 11/03/08 0 days
Ohio Poll 11/03/08 0 days
Georgia Poll 11/03/08 3 days
Pennsylvania Poll 10/31/08 0 days
Michigan Poll 10/31/08 0 days
New Hampshire Poll 10/31/08 2 days
Washington Poll 10/29/08 1 days
Wisconsin Poll 10/28/08 0 days
New Jersey Poll 10/28/08 4 days
Florida Poll 10/24/08 0 days
Ohio Poll 10/24/08 0 days
Pennsylvania Poll 10/24/08 0 days
Georgia Poll 10/24/08 14 days
Florida Poll 10/10/08 0 days
Ohio Poll 10/10/08 1 days
Pennsylvania Poll 10/09/08 0 days
Georgia Poll 10/09/08 7 days
Wisconsin Poll 10/02/08 1 days
(hitting char limit, to be continued)
New Jersey Poll 10/01/08 5 days
Michigan Poll 09/26/08 0 days
New Hampshire Poll 09/26/08 1 days
Pennsylvania Poll 09/25/08 0 days
Florida Poll 09/25/08 6 days
Washington Poll 09/19/08 0 days
New Jersey Poll 09/19/08 7 days
Ohio Poll 09/12/08 0 days
Georgia Poll 09/12/08 1 days
Pennsylvania Poll 09/11/08 1 days
Wisconsin Poll 09/10/08 0 days
Michigan Poll 09/10/08 14 days
Florida Poll 08/27/08 13 days
Wisconsin Poll 08/14/08 15 days
Washington Poll 07/30/08 0 days
Pennsylvania Poll 07/30/08 12 days
New Jersey Poll 07/18/08 46 days
Georgia Poll 06/02/08 0 days
Florida Poll 06/02/08 19 days
Georgia Poll 05/14/08 23 days
Pennsylvania Poll 04/21/08 5 days
Pennsylvania Poll 04/16/08 7 days
Pennsylvania Poll 04/09/08 5 days
Pennsylvania Poll 04/04/08 22 days
Pennsylvania Poll 03/13/08 29 days
Wisconsin Poll 02/13/08 9 days
New Jersey Poll 02/04/08 0 days
Georgia Poll 02/04/08 7 days
Florida Poll 01/28/08 4 days
Florida Poll 01/24/08 7 days
Florida Poll 01/17/08 7 days
Michigan Poll 01/10/08 3 days
New Hampshire Poll 01/07/08 5 days
Iowa Poll 01/02/08 N/A
46 is high, but it's certainly not so high we can expect that they've stopped - especially with the 100 day interval in there.
Pragmatus said...
"...reaching something of an apotheosis during the Bush Administration..."
An apex perhaps? Or are you suggesting a new nadir in the conflation of (fake) science and religion?
@psy: I think a better question is when, if ever, did SV actually start polling. That was the basis of Nate's challenge in his "Open Letter to David Johnson": "What
call center(s) have you used to conduct your public-facing polling? For every call center that you're willing to publicly disclose, up to a maximum of 5, I will donate $538 to Children's Healthcare of Atlanta (http://www.choa.org/)."
Well done. As a testament to your tenacity, I present 538 as the top hit in a google search for '"strategic vision" polling'
Put a fork in him. He's done.
Jacob…
I deliberate chose to use apotheosis, I even looked it up to make sure the meaning could be stretched in this way, and also allude to the entire pseudo-religious aspect of right-wing politics. Merriam-Webster defines apotheosis as 1. elevation to divine status, and 2. the perfect example.
Apex would have served too, but not provided the extra jab I was looking for…
:o) :o) :o)
Has anyone noticed that in all of SVs polls, the rounded percentages add to 100% all the time? I wrote this up here: Totals equal 100% because of lying. I also drew attention to an Arizona poll that looks to be a clone of the Oklahoma one: Frightening, but not for the obvious reason.
Ryan: But who's to say Scozzafava would have voted against health care? Based on her voting record I'd say it was no better than 50/50.
I'd put her odds of voting no at far higher than 50%. No Republican voted yes other than Cao, who is from a very Democratic district. Seems that Republicans in the House have been under a lot of pressure to stay unified. (Heck, that goes for the Senate too; look what happened to Specter for voting for the stimulus, and the grief Snowe has gotten for voting in committee for its health care reform bill.)
My speculation is that she'd probably have voted no on principle, but even if she were ambivalent she wouldn't have bucked party leadership on this one.
Juris: I'm familiar with the background. Just showing the stats that 46 days since the last posted poll results (whether they are real or not) is not significant.
Love it when Nate pours gasoline on the fire - hahahaha!
Poor, poor SV.
interesting .. I've worked with Strategic Vision in the automotive space for a number of years.. one of the most buttoned up research co's. The SV that did the OK study appears to be an entirely different company ... very strange
@Karina, and all the ones who've quoted it since:
It's not just Oklahoma - the view isn't looking much better from up here in New York, though instead of Republicans trying to dismantle public schools, we have Democrats lowering testing standards to prevent those schools from being closed, and rich businessmen setting up McHighSchools across the state.
I unfortunately didn't go to high school in the States, so I can't say one way or the other how much reform is needed in the area of civics; but Strategic Vision isn't helping the situation with this kind of polling.
@Steve: "Has anyone noticed that in all of SVs polls, the rounded percentages add to 100% all the time?"
That doesn't necessarily mean anything, except that they handle rounding differently than most survey/polling firms. I think the general practice in the U.S. today is to round to the nearest integer, and in cases where the fractional part of the actual result is exactly 1/2, either to round up, or to the nearest even number.
But in other times, other places, and other fields, the practice has been to apply rounding rules that permit the sum of a question's marginals to reach exactly 100%. (I'm sorry for the awkward phrasing; I'm sure practitioners of "numerical analysis" could supply a more elegant terminology.)
The U.S. House of Representatives has exactly 435 voting members, regardless of the results of each Census, because of the rules used for the assignment of seats to states - even if that means one or more state may get a whole additional Member, even though they "deserve" slightly less than half of one.
There's no right or wrong in rounding rules; each method has strengths and weaknesses.
One factor which has added complexity to the analysis of SV-LLC's results has been that we have no idea what rounding rules they use. As I understand, that was the reason Michael(mbw) completely abandoned the 2-period Fourier wave - he was afraid the pattern might have somehow been an artifact of the (unknown) rule used.
@m:
On the name Strategic Vision, in his first column on this controversy Nate noted that Strategic Vision LLC (the "polling" entity that claims its home office is in Atlanta) was different from Strategic Vision, Inc. (San Diego) (the respected company that you worked for).
The Arizona poll looks very similar to the OK poll because it was done before Oklahoma's.
And the reports of each were written by the same PhD who is a VP of research for the TA DA Goldwater Institute. Given that the Senator after whom it is name was Mr. Conservative for a long time is it any wonder that it bends to the right?
Alot of people here are acting like the think tank strategic vision worked for was wronged in some way, hate to break it to you but think tanks are about shaping public opinion and advising policy.
They have agendas, and are not interested in representing the truth. They're interested in manipulating the public and the politicians, and biased polls are something they're looking for.
That's why they pay for them. The only crime against them here was getting caught with so blatant a fraud.
I think the lesson is that if you're going to sell your polling services to someone, you'd better make up believable results that can stand up to scrutiny by experts, not just oddball outcomes that will be highlighted by interest groups and the media. Politically, I disagree with Nate most of the time, but I definitely welcome someone who honestly analyzes information and seeks to get it right rather than promoting an agenda with statistics, the way so many on every side do.
I have to mostly agree with David. You DO have to make your polling results believable, but here's a better way to do it than half-baked fabrications. For those, you have to be super, super intelligent, which very few are.
The better way to do it is with leading questions (or even by throwing out portions of the respondents that don't fit your meme.)
Polls must always be taken with a grain of salt. Sadly, it seems, the grain of salt was all Strategic Gism had to offer.
there are two Strategic Visions: is the good one getting impacted by this at all?
I think the REAL strategic vision needs to sue this dastardly bastard out of existence. They (fairly obviously) attached themselves to the good name of a great institution to gain undue credibility.
What if I set up a fraud polling company and called it Gallup America Polling LLC, and tarnished the reputation of the legitimate company?
These guys don't just owe money back to untold clients (more than is available,) but they need to be investigated for criminal charges.
I don't think they're 1st, partisan, but rather 1st, fraudulent and 2nd, partisan. How many small, local elections have relied on their polling to craft their strategy and message? How many of them lost working on best advice and polling of Strategic
Vision?
The Republicans have been losing in bad, bad ways over the past few cycles, so as a liberal, I should pretend to be happy about this. (I'm not a partisan hack, so I'm not about to do that, so donkey rockers et al can tuck that away tidily.)
These guys need to be brought up on charges, held to account for whatever crimes (massive? sweeping?) they've committed, and the rest of pollsters need to take note of it.
These were not partisan propagandeers, but capitalist greedsters. No conspiracy here, just a clown or two with dollar signs in their eyes.
For clarification purposes,it should be pointed out that there are two SV organizations involved in polling, one of which SV inc as Juris pointed out, has been shown to be very reliable. In reading through the thread it is not apparent that every one here understands this.
can8tiv2000 said And the reports of each were written by the same PhD who is a VP of research for the TA DA Goldwater Institute. Given that the Senator after whom it is name was Mr. Conservative for a long time is it any wonder that it bends to the right?
However it does not bend to the right in the manner that Goldwater was. The attack on public schools in this country is largely driven by fundamentalist Christians, the very people who Goldwater thought were a "danger to the country." There is probably no major political figure in the last 20 years that was more staunchly opposed to the religious takeover of the GOP than Goldwater and religion's role in government is at the very heart of this issue. Goldwater was exceptionally opposed to increasing the power of religion in government.
Shortly before his death, Goldwater told "conservative" religious leaders, "Do not associate my name with anything you do. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican party much more than the Democrats have." Now, eleven years later, we all can see the wisdom in that.
No, I don't think Goldwater would have supported cooking polling numbers at all. If Goldwater were alive today, "Mr. Conservative" would be considered far too liberal for the GOP leadership.
To describe the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs as "conservative-leaning" is being generous.
They are a conservative political organization in the most conservative state in the U.S. There is no "leaning" to their orientation.
James sez "They are a conservative political organization in the most conservative state in the U.S. There is no "leaning" to their orientation."
Georgia is the most leaning? Not a bit. You're conflating the fraud-wisher with the fraud-giver. Not the same animal at all.
@10kZebra
James was talking about Oklahoma, not Georgia.
Man, isn't there more important stuff to be writing about today? I checked the site expecting lots of the usual well-thought-out commentary on the health care vote, Anh Cao, likely prospects in the senate, etc., and I find only this one follow-up to a follow-up on an issue that, if it were a horse, would be glue. It feels a little like Mr. Ag has a mild case of "somebody on the internet is wrong" disease.
Oh Jesus DMW, is that the best you can do for partisan hackery??? Step up you game, clown-face, you've got to put up a better facade than that.
This issue is settled. It isn't partisan, it's human. These people (SV) aren't dems or repubes, they're just scammers.
Can't you take this as the victory for all humanity that it is??? Now you have to go after the sole Republican that voted from his conscience (or constituency)???
You're not just a fucktard, you're something beyond that entirely... you're an employee of abig-insurance.
Good on you.
Awesome post, 10kzebra. But I wasn't "going after" Anh Cao-- he's actually my new hero. I just wanted to hear what the 538 guys thought about how his vote will affect his re-election prospects, whether it will affect the senate vote, etc., and I was disappointed to instead read a kind of boring story about an unimportant albeit apparently fraudulent polling company. Pity me, man-- I need more entertaining distractions from my stultifying job insuring abigs.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/08/why-unemployment-probably-wont-hit-10.html
Another fine example of Nate Silver's hackery.
And no I don't care about SV or any of their stupid polls, Nate Silver is about as legitimate and it's time people start saying so.
Time to concede that Nate may have stumbled onto something here. That doesn't change the fact that he did some very hamhanded research initially and followed that up with some very awkward/childish attacks.
The day is still coming when he's going to open his mouth about something that he doesn't have a clue about and be thoroughly embarrassed. Not just name-tarnishing embarrassment but career-ending, utter-humiliation, gotta-pack-my-bags-and-seclude-myself-as-a-postal-employee-in-Glendive-Montana type embarrassment.
The day Nate Silver falls into an irrelevant oblivion will be the opening act of a month long celebration for me.
Regarding the two Strategic Visions:
SV INC legal dept has been notified of the whole fiasco (I believe they are the ones who monitor customer satisfaction for retailers such as the Dodge Truck commercial I saw the other night). I had hoped they would weigh in on SV LLC skating around on their coattails.
Someone on this comment section actually did a search awhile back and found 29 or so different organizations that listed that name or some variation as a business in individual states. No idea how many of those are active.
I liken it to having more than one beauty salon named "Shear Expectations" or "A Cut Above" in every state. Not really a problem until you start becoming a national chain (What is it with beauty salons and corny names?).
Likewise, if my name is McDonald, I can probably open a local business named 'McDonald's' as long as it isn't selling hamburgers.
Interestingly, Apple Corps (the Beatles' Record Label) has sued Apple computers at least seven different times over trademark infringement. Apple Corps has generally come out the winner each time even though they aren't as internationally recognized and weren't even in the same industry until Mr Jobs figured out how to make a buck with iTunes.
Mule Rider FINALLY sucked an ounce of ball!!! How does it taste, my half-horse friend? Salty, I trust, no?
Drink it in, savor the flavor. This is an instance we're unlikely to ever see again. Mule Ridden only eats crow when it's forced down his gullet like a pound of sweaty man-flesh, and not to say he doesn't love it - oh my he does - it's just that it's so hard to get him to take the inches he loves so sincerely down his eager gullet-hole.
Take it bitch. Take it.
Got any more predictions for us? Please, start them with "I promise you" or "Mark my words", because those are all that much better to throw back in your face like the rePUBElican acid that you daily espouse.
My moment is fleeting, so pardon me for one last time screaming "TAKE IT, BITCH!"
@10kZebra,
Whether your over-the-top bile is borne out of sincerity or simply being facetious, that was funny.
Hope you didn't think it put a dent in my ego, though.
I never really defended SV LLC but was always more critical of Nate's approach...notice my knock on his hamhanded research initially and his childish attacks. His day is coming, one way or another. I promise.
Oh Donkey baby, the fact you'd give me a passing thought by name is more than enough for me.
I was being serious, and comical, and I'm glad you took me at both levels of account.
Did you never defend SV, or did you never REALLY defend SV? Quite a difference, so you tell me (and do it honestly, because I'm trusting you on this one.)
Hamhanded sounds like a reach-around from Miss Piggy, so if you're going to take Mr. Silver to task, please establish your goalpost now, you know, so you can't keep moving it as convenience dicktates... wait, did I mis-pell that? Nope. Dick's tate as they must, my dear equine aficionado.
538 is a blog of fact, so indulge us for a moment - How will Nate's day be "coming"? Stoop to my dysfunctional level if you like and be juvenile if that's all you've got, but be specific.
Nate's been careful, calculated, transparent with his equations (arguably to a fault,) and as such has appeared on 1,000 times more hours of talk show than you have... unless you're Shaun Hannity, in which case, shit man, by all means slink off with your outer-labia between your legs.
;0
Re: Cao ~ as he really is a Dem, which was part of his appeal in the first place to LA-2 voters who elected him, he will probably switch parties and his health care vote was the first step in the process.
Louisiana politicians have a longgg history of switching parties as there ain't a spit of difference between a moderate/conservative Rep and a conservative Dem down there.
carry on
p.s. as long as he doesn't get caught wearing diapers at a New Orleans/Washington D.C. brothel, Cao should be ok ;) and even then ...
Regarding fraud:
I'm curious about the term 'fraud'. Any of our legal eagles out there want to weigh in?
In copyright, we have what's known as chain of indemnity which protects the consumer from fraud. It holds the writer responsible for any fraud and indemnifies the mnfg, distributor, retailer, and anyone else up and down the chain to the consumer from being sued by a consumer for fraudulent material.
James posted the chain example for science the other day in that science tries to police itself from inadequacies (since all subsequent science will be based on your findings). I don't know if there are legal ramifications here since I see people all the time use bogus science to support their personal agendas: climate change deniers, for example.
Same with academia. Your stuff has to be peer reviewed to be taken seriously.
mikesbodypolitic frames my question quite well. Is it fraud only when the person who has laid down the money feels they have been duped rather than the unknowing public who sees 'National polling organization Strategic Visions has determined Oklahoma students are stupid and need a better education system'?
I mean I could go out and set up a polling organization named "Mr. Universe Research", cherry pick a bunch of climate change deniers, and sell data to oil companies that says '8 out of 10 experts agree that global warming is a myth'. Is that illegal or just unethical? Who is perpetuating the fraud and how is being victimized?
Same with OCPA. What's the legal angle?
Whoa, picked the wrong time to have a serious discussion. Maybe try these posts later.
Killing it, my friend.
@Pete,
I went ahead and posted on Neil Stevens' RedState blog. We'll see if he responds, but I doubt it.
Maybe all the OK students that SV 'polled' were smarter than we think? After all, everybody knows that the first president of the United States was John Hanson, right?
John said...
Maybe all the OK students that SV 'polled' were smarter than we think? After all, everybody knows that the first president of the United States was John Hanson, right?
Since I once lived within 1 mile of the John Hanson Highway (Rte 50) in Maryland, and didn't know who John Hanson was when I moved to that residence, so I did quite a bit of research on John Hanson, I think I can answer your question.
WRONG.
John Hanson was the first President of Congress to be elected under the terms of the Articles of Confederation.
There was no office titled President of the United States until the Constitution was ratified, after which George Washington was elected as the first person to be elected as President of the United States.
President of Congress does NOT mean President of the United States.
Try reading this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hanson , and then do more research. John Hanson is underappreciated in American history, but he was NOT the first President of the United States.
Mike in Maryland
@Mark Grebner: While there's no right or wrong in rounding rules, it's definitely wrong to report a result as, say, 11% when the actual value is not between 10.5% and 11.5%. SV must be doing this, and relatively often (in between 1/10 and 1/4 of its polls, regardless of rounding rules).
Similarly, rounding 1/10 to 74% would not be "handling rounding differently."
If 900 people are surveyed, and the yes/no/undecided numbers are 300/300/300, no rounding rule should give the results as 33%/33%/34%. It's not a question of what rule they might be following. It's a question of there being no possible rule (probably because there is no data).
The rules for apportioning representatives do result in assigning multiples of 1/435 that are not always the closest ones to each state's fraction of the population. But representative counts aren't summary statistics.
At the very least, reporting that a proportion is X% when it's in fact closer to X-1% or X+1% (which SV must be doing) is statistical malpractice. At worst, it's lying.
I feel like I just entered Bizzaro world. Nate's either or conclusion is not supportable. The simple fact is that both polls could easily be skewed or suspect.
Consider that Cannaday's "poll" only asked seniors in one district - his political district.
Consider that Cannaday is a politician who is a former educator. Ya think that might present significant bias.
Consider that the "poll" was apparently administered through the schools. That means teachers and administrators. Does anybody think that Cannaday, and these school employees might have a vested interest? Could news of the impending poll possibly have leaked out? Gee ya think?
Was this a "poll" or an administered test? Did everybody take it at once? Note that essentially all seniors were asked the questions - presumably in a classroom situation, not all alone at the end of a phone. Anybody think maybe there was some conversation between students during all of this?
Consider that there has been a lot of publicity about the poll results and questions. Quite possibly there has even been classroom discussion beyond the comments in the various media. Don't you folks think that can affect the results.
Maybe Strategic Vision's poll was bogus. But clearly Cannaday's poll is.
I don't know much about Nate Silver, but his failure to note and discuss these obvious problems and to then come to the "either or" conclusion that he presented pretty much discredits either his objectivity, capabilities, or both.
wturber -
Bizarro world is a classroom where only 23% of high school students know who the first president was.
Bizzaro world is a poll that reports std dev of total scores that can be calculated by assuming that correlations between the questions is essentially 0.
Bizzaro world is when a pollster claims no money charged for political polling.
Bizzaro world is when a pollster threatens to sue, but then quietly walks away from polling races in Virginia, New Jersey and New York.
Bizzaro world is when the sponser of a poll doesn't even bother to defend the poll and simply says they're not ready to toss out the results yet.
You can question the motives of Cannaday all you want, but OCPA has questionable motives also.
At least there is confirmation that Cannaday surveyed students. Until some alleged callers and called students come forward, the idea that SV even surveyed any students will remain speculation.
Nate appears to have pulled off a minor coup in outing a fraudulent pollster that had slipped past the media and political scientists.
Alan -
Yes, there are lots of Bizzaro things in this world. But this article by Nate and a whole lot of the positive responses to Nate's article simply must be included in the group. Listing other Bizzaro things doesn't change that.
The issue isn't just Cannaday's bias. It is all the other things that are either clearly wrong with his "poll" or that would bear investigation before coming to conclusions about what his "poll" really shows. That Nate has ignored these issues and has actually spun Cannaday's bias so that is might appear to be add credence to Cannaday is damning to Nate's credibility. The problems are obvious and so many people here seem unable to see them.
Mind you, I have no dog in this fight either politically or otherwise. And I have major problems with both major political parties in this country. So if Nate can skewer SV, LLC legitimately, more power to him, I say. But the Cannaday "poll" is not a legitimate counterpoint to the SV, LLC poll and Nate skewers himself by not noting the obvious problems and by presenting the Cannaday "poll" as though it is a legitimate counterpoint. No amount of people giving Nate kudos and claiming "checkmate" can change that.
You've demonstrated absolutely no evidence of any bias on Cannaday's part. You've speculated about his motives, but you've provided not the slightest bit of evidence to support your assertion.
As opposed to Nate, who had provided reams of evidence based on statistical analysis of SV's "work."
Nor have you even attempted to refute any of Nate's claims about the implausible results SV reached, and the odd patterns found in their data.
Joe -
If your comment is directed to me, I've pointed out a number of things wrong with Cannaday's poll that have nothing at all to do with any bias on his part. These things on their own pretty much invalidate using Canaday's poll for comparison.
Short list:
1) Senior's only
2) One school district only
3) "Poll" taken after huge amounts of publicity about the subject from the first poll and the widespread publication of the ten questions.
To this you can add the potential for bias from Cannaday and the "pollsters" (teachers?) and how the test - er "poll" was administered.
You are correct that I've made no attempt to refute Nate's other claims. And I have no intention of doing so. For all I know, he is dead on in his statistical analysis and the conclusions he has drawn from them. But given his clear bias in how he presented Cannaday's "poll", I do have cause to be suspicious that his other work might have built-in biases as well.
This recent article does not bolster his previous position, it damages it. I'd have been more inclined to trust Nate's analysis prior to reading this current article.
wturber -
This has to be looked at in the context of the other evidence against SV.
Just look at the "First President" question. Do you accept 23% as valid? I don't. I'm much more willing to accept 98%. I'm pretty sure I would get that if I asked high school students - and I live in Georgia.
I just don't know any kids who grew up in the US that don't know who the first President is. It's one of the few things that all Americans seem to know.
The probability that SV's and Cannaday's results for that question came from the same distribution is 1.2412E-131 (chi-square=596, DF=1).
Personally, I'm unwilling to believe that the school system and Cannaday perpetrated a hoax. I'm perfectly willing to believe that SV did.
If you don't believe Cannaday, do you're own survey of OK students. It would be difficult, but it would only take 50 or so cases to see whether 23% or 98% is closer to the truth. In fact, do a survey at your local mall one Saturday afternoon. I'm betting you get around 98%.
I've know of Nate Silver from Baseball Prospectus for several years without being terribly impressed, but in the last year and a half I've come to think of the man as a genius. Not because he does everything perfectly (his use of stats is sometimes flawed), but because he is able to grab an insight that that was there for everyone to see, but everybody missed. To my knowledge, nobody saw SV as fraudulent, but Nate did. You can pick at stuff he's done, but it's hard to argue with his results.
Did Nate hurt his credibility? Nate took a shot at SV and they seem to have dropped from the sky. That looks like a hit in my book.
Alan -
Based on my personal experience and expectations and looking only at the poll results - I find neither poll to be credible.I've seen too many game show contestants and Jay Walking college graduates get too many obvious questions wrong to think 98% on the first president question is valid. And I agree. The 23% seems too low also. But more incredibly, I don't believe 81% of high school students know who wrote the Declaration of Independence. Of course, I don't know the truth about these questions. I haven't done the study and both of these studies present good reason for people to doubt the results.
But the point isn't whether I believe Cannaday's results or not. And as I said, it isn't whether SV's results are bogus or not. The point is that Cannaday's survey has obvious flaws and that Nate ignored these flaws and claimed it as good evidence against SV's poll. Pot, meet Kettle. That's a context that I think some of Nate's readers should be thinking about.
And it is worth noting that neither you or anybody else seems to be even trying to take issue with my specific criticisms of the Cannaday "poll." Isn't the spectre of conflicts of interest one of the major reasons that organizations hire third parties to do their polling. Cannaday didn't do that. His poll could reasonably be dismissed on that basis alone let alone all the other problems.
Saying that the results seem more credible to you isn't much of an argument. And propping up the straw man of a "hoax" isn't much of a counterpoint. I never said "hoax" or even implied it. I said Cannaday's study is flawed on the face of it and quite possibly even more flawed than the obvious facts would suggest. It isn't much of a hoax when the problems with what you've done are so obvious. It's just sad that so many people didn't immediately jump up and point out the problem.
Since when were our personal subjective impressions supposed to be a good measure of these things? Isn't the whole point of polling to remove such subjectivity?
And yes, Nate hurt his credibility - at least he did with people who consider this subject with even a fair bit of objectivity. You simply can't reasonably draw the conclusions that Nate has drawn by using the Cannaday poll.
Let me sum up my problem with Nate's recent article on this poll question. I have no problem with Nate uncovering a bad poll. In fact, I think it is great if, in fact that's what he's done. My problem is with the hypocrisy of holding polls to different standards and using an obviously poorlly done poll to support a previous position. That's it in a nutshell.
I did further research and found the following paper. It basically casts significant doubt on the SV poll and the results from Cannaday's "poll" by using a small poll of the author's own, and by doing reasearch on the results of past tests of a similar type. Many of the existing test results were multiple choice and even then the students didn't do as well as Cannaday's poll. But also, when making reasonable and even pessimistic adjustments for the test bias of a multiple choice format vs. open answer format, the author concludes that in all but one question, the SV poll results are far more pessimistic than we should expect. So basically, this paper show what I expected. That both polls are giving bad results.
http://galton.uchicago.edu/techreports/tr579.pdf
The subtitle of this site is "Politics Done Right." Well, by gosh then do it right. Don't accept any old poll just because it supports the notion you want to prove. It is exactly that kind of baloney that pervades politics and that we can do without. And Nate has made it clear that he, at least in this case, isn't that concerned with doing it right.
Some here are comparing the quality of Cannaday's methods with the quality of SV's alleged methods. The issue is whether or not SV simply made up the results, not whether or not they took the poll in a fair or optimal way.
Remember their results on how many justices are on the Supreme Court?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/9/18/784082/-Was-the-Oklahoma-2.8-civic-pass-rate-faked
That was
5: 5%
6: 11%
7: 0%
8: 15%
9: 10%
10: 21%
11: 0%.
12: 7%
A first pass through a calculation that these results would occur by normal chance processes on a sample of 1000 gives about 1/10^80. That's right, if those zeroes at 7% and 11% are really zeroes, the denominator is around 1 with 80 zeroes after it.
That's way past the range where it even makes sense to discuss the statistics. Instead one could perhaps discuss explanations other than fraud- a tired clerk typing nonsense numbers, etc. That these are real results is simply not one of the possibilities.
@wturber-
Did you think no one would look up the Molnar paper? Its conclusion is "Thoreau once wrote, 'Some
circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk' (1850). At this
point, between methodology, comparisons, and incorrect answers, there are several fish in sight.
The evidence strongly suggests unacceptable studies. If there is direct evidence validating the
truthfulness of these results, I call upon Strategic Vision, LLC, the Goldwater Institute, or the
Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs to release it. "
And you are proposing that we take some sort of middle ground between these fish and actual polls?
Lending further doubt on the results of SV LLC on the question of number of Supreme Court justices:
The 'favored' answer for that question (selected by 21%) was 10 justices.
If someone misread the question and thought the question was about the Oklahoma state Supreme Court, the answer would STILL be 9.
If that person were smart (and/or smart-alecky) enough to know that the Chief Justice is not a justice (why would the word 'Chief' be in their title otherwise?), they would answer 8, not 10.
If someone misread the question and thought the question was about the Oklahoma state Supreme Court, and ALSO knew that in addition to a Chief Justice, there is also a Vice-Chief Justice, that reduces the number of 'justices' (actually they are titled 'Associate Justices' in Oklahoma) to seven, a number that 0% of the 'surveyed' students selected.
So, unless Oklahoma teaches math as adding when numbers are taken away (I seriously doubt that), the progression goes in the wrong direction - the number increases when, even if you have a super-smart (and/or smart-alecky) student, it should be decreasing.
Mike in Maryland
wturber -
Let's get some perspective here. You claim the Cannaday's poll was seriously flawed. Now balance that against the claim that SV's data was collected by a proctologist.
The Molnar study certainly adds support to that hypothesis.
After reading the Molnar study, I'll give you that Cannaday's results are probably too high.
Still with the exception of the constitution question, Cannaday's results were closer to the Bellarmine students' results.
Even if Cannaday's results are flawed, there are witnesses to verify that the survey was actually conducted. Right now that's more than we can say about SV's poll.
This is Adam Molnar. Thanks for looking up my report. It contains the older evidence I could find. Feel free to send me comments and ideas.
Particularly, if someone has time, it would be great if someone could try to find more research on the difference between fill-in-the-blank and multiple choice tests. I found and listed a few things, but there was less than I thought there would be.
As I say, the Bellarmine sample is not representative. It's got some flaws, which I note. My students didn't have advance notice of the questions, so that at least is fair.
Wayne Greene of the Tulsa World has published some articles and blog entries on this controversy:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/webextra/blogs/weblog.aspx?column_id=30
Mr. Greene and Mr. Dutcher are right; proper replication would be helpful here.
@Adam Molnar- Yes, nice newspaper article. Certainly it sounds like the Cannaday poll wouldn't be reliable enough to serve as a basis for policy. However, one does want to make sure that people understand that there's not some sort of symmetry between a sincere, open, amateur effort and systematic fraud.
One must wonder why there is no strong central governing organization or accreditation for polling practices as there are in other professions. Polling is a science when conducted correctly and one of the guiding principles of this organization should be the objectivity of the polling questions as well as the error rate of the responses. Many of these principles are routinely practiced by many polling firms but there are always those that seek to circumvent the science of polling and wish to propagandize a particular point of view by making their stuff up.
Maybe there is such an organization already and if there isn't, what are your plans for the future Mr. Silver?
@ Mule Rider
Wow. In the political, statistic-y blogosphere, Nate is among maybe the top 5 "go to" dudes. And I enjoy reading him. But that's a frighteningly small and specialized media space with a relatively inconsistent following in the grand scheme of things. And you care about his success? Well, hells bells. To each his own, but damned if I'd not consider it a personal failing to harbor such a focused and inconsequential concentration of animus to one dude.
@J.J.E. - Wow. In the political, statistic-y blogosphere, Nate is among maybe the top 5 "go to" dudes. And I enjoy reading him. But that's a frighteningly small and specialized media space with a relatively inconsistent following in the grand scheme of things. And you care about his success? Well, hells bells. To each his own, but damned if I'd not consider it a personal failing to harbor such a focused and inconsequential concentration of animus to one dude.
You fail to understand our donkey showman, he has FAITH, good sir, and with that, you can say whatever you want, cite any niche factoids that supports his preconceived notions, and generally make, well, an ass of himself. It's right in the name, I'm surprised you didn't catch on to it sooner.
Also, were it not for MuleRider, or as Ike from South Park says, Donkey Raping Shit Eater, there would be a void here left open for legitimate dissenting voicees, and as the freeptards keep telling us, we'd never stand for that. Our heads would explode.
I've written about the Goldwater Institute Civics test in Arizona, which pre-dated the one in Oklahoma, a number of times on Blog for Arizona. I just put up a new post -- http://arizona.typepad.com/blog/2009/11/fooled-gold-another-look-at-the-gi-civics-test.html -- which includes the complete survey results the Goldwater Institute received from Strategic Vision. The raw figures have some interesting anomalies in them.
I also linked to the high school civics study the Goldwater Institute published, as well as 2 other studies drawn from the same survey.
I have the papers from my students. Tomorrow, I'm going to type up a list of wrong answers. Then we can compare the distributions.
I can't answer about the true level of knowledge, because my students are not from the same population. However, there's more and more evidence of falsified results from SV, LLC. Even though the correct answer percentages will differ between my collegians and AZ/OK high school pupils, there's no reason that the wrong answers should be vastly different.
Wow! Kids did better the second time around after the questions were widely publicized. Who would have thought?
Dennis said "Wow! Kids did better the second time around after the questions were widely publicized. Who would have thought?"
Come on Dennis, don't be an apologist. You're not that dumb. Are you suggesting that kids read the news? Are you suggesting that teaching kids things ensures they'll know the answers? I'm not sure what you're saying, but there's no apology or logic in the results of the SV Poll.
Post a Comment