[EM] lying to pollsters (was comparative effectiveness ...)

[Russ Paielli]

Forest Simmons simmonfo-at-up.edu |EMlist| wrote:
>> From: Russ Paielli <6049awj02 at sneakemail.com>

>> So what is the optimal strategy in responding to an Approval poll? Do
>> any or all voters have an incentive to lie about their cutoff point --
>> or perhaps to even rearrange their preference order before drawing the
>> line? And how would such strategy affect convergence if everyone adopted
>> it? Will honest respondents be at a disadvantage?
>>
>> Obviously that question is a lot easier to ask than it is to answer, but
>> I think some sort of answer in necessary before Approval can be fully
>> evaluated.
>>
> 
> I think that the average person would be apt to play up support for his 
> favorite and down play support for compromise, and that most folks would 
> take this into account when interpreting the polls.

I'd really like to know what the optimal strategy is for replying to a 
pre-election Approval poll. If anyone is capable of determining that, 
you are probably the one, Mr. Simmons. I suggest you put your capable 
mind to it.

Maybe that strategy is just too darn complicated to formulate. Then 
again, maybe the optimal strategy in replying to a poll is not much 
different from the optimal strategy in the actual election. If that is 
the case, then the "disinformation" problem may not be too bad.

> I don't think the problem is with respondents lying so much as with 
> private corporate pollsters having conflicts of interest (to some 
> degree) and (to a much greater degree) corporate news media selectively 
> spinning the results while reporting to the voting public.

That depends on what kind of advantage can be gained by lying to 
pollsters. If a significant advantage can be gained, it will be done. If 
not, it probably won't. But I sympathize with your concern about 
corporate news spin. I can just imagine how fair CBS will be to 
Republicans! "Spin" isn't the word for it.

> 
> Better to start with zero info strategy, and build up data, election by 
> election.
> 
> That's where Condorcet has an advantage over Approval: no lag time.

True, but Condorcet is not on the horizon.

--Russ