Campaign trial heats as election forecasts: Measurement error and bias in 2004 presidential campaign polls

Mark Pickup and Richard Johnston

International Journal of Forecasting, 2008, vol. 24, issue 2, 272-284

Abstract: If late-campaign polls are to be used as forecasts, it is important to ask, how well do the polls do and why are some polls better forecasts than others? We analytically compare alternative methods for estimating the systematic bias in the election trial heat polls of the individual polling houses and of the polling industry as a whole. We put each technique to the test using data from the 2004 US Presidential election. From the collection of evidence we are able to identify the approach that produces the most efficient unbiased estimates and answer the question of how the polls did in 2004. A third of the houses exhibited large and significant biases, but the industry as a whole converged on the truth.

Date: 2008
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169-2070(08)00030-7
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:intfor:v:24:y:2008:i:2:p:272-284

Access Statistics for this article

International Journal of Forecasting is currently edited by R. J. Hyndman

More articles in International Journal of Forecasting from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().