Picture: Grant Dixon
Picture: Grant Dixon
Bold has claimed “without this robust sample size achieved, locals would otherwise likely continue to speculate over public sentiment”, but in fact the sample size provides no reason for anyone to stop speculating. The reason for this is that small sample size is but one of many factors that can impact upon the reliability of an opinion survey, and while too small a sample size means that a survey is unreliable, a large sample size does not demonstrate that a survey can be trusted.
The main limitation of Bold’s survey, one that cannot be overcome by pointing to the sample size, is that it is an opt-in poll.
[..]
That 71% of those claiming to be Greens supporters who responded said that they supported the concept in no way means that this is true of Greens supporters overall. It may just mean that those Greens supporters who liked the proposal were more likely to feel motivated to fill in the survey (especially to send a message to their party!), while those who were opposed to it were more likely to think that the survey was a waste of time, a push-poll or a stunt.
[..]
The general problem with an introductory statement of this kind is that all that is being measured on the basis of it is public response to the most favorable possible (or perhaps the most favorable impossible) conception of the development. A similar survey that started with an introductory statement outlining all the potential problems with the development would receive a much more negative result, but would it then prove that a massive percentage of voters had reservations about the idea?
Read more: http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/public-opinion-and-mt-wellington-cable.html
If you have a question or comment for Dr Bonham you can post it on his site. You will need to have (or to create) a Google/Blogger account, LiveJournal profile, WordPress account, AIM profile, TypePad account or OpenID to comment.
Also note Dr Bonham’s popular Legislative Council candidate profile article is regularly updated: http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/legco-two-early-challengers.html More Legislative Council coverage expected soon!
• Earlier on Tasmanian Times …
• Does Tasmania need more conflict and division over development?
• Cable car: Escalation of media campaign
• Draft Plan proposes virtually unfettered development at the summit of Mt Wellington
• Springs plan better than a cable car
• Liberals stirring division over cable car
• What Mt Wellington really needs
