In an email, the insightful Audacious  Epigone pointed out that in my recent  VDARE.com assault on rigged questions about immigration, I had flat-out  missed the worst survey research sin committed by the contrivers of the April  13th LA Times poll. I overlooked the LAT's biggest feat of  sleight-of-hand because I concentrated too much on the biased wording of the  individual proposals, rather than on the bigger picture.
The LAT offered respondents the following "three proposals" and  asked whether they supported or opposed each one (in other words, the proposals  were not mutually exclusive). See if you can spot how they contrived the  grouping of the questions to artificially lower the amount of immigration  restrictionist support.
1.  "Create a guest-worker program that would give a temporary visa to  noncitizens who want to legally work in the U.S."
2. "Allow undocumented immigrants who have been living and working in the  U.S. for a number of years, with no criminal record, to start a path to  citizenship."
3. "Fence off hundreds of miles of the border between the U.S. and Mexico  and make it a felony to enter illegally."
Yet, are there          really just three proposals here?
     
       No, there are four:
1.          Guest-worker program
       2. Amnesty
       3A. Fence
       3B. Felony
The two          pro-immigration proposals were made independent of each other, while the          two anti-immigration proposals were linked together with the logical operator          "and." The word "and" is the opposite of          "or" -- you're only supposed to answer "Support" for          #3 if you favor both the fence and the felony.
     
       Thus, if you supported the guest-worker program but not the amnesty, or          vice-versa, you'd still be counted by the LAT as supporting one          of the first two proposals for increased immigration. But if you          supported the fence but not the felony, or vice-versa, you'd be          logically forced to answer "oppose" to the combined proposal.
*
Also, In Slate.com, Mickey Kaus comments on my original VDARE.com article on the poll here (page up once you get there).
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
 
 
 
 Posts
Posts
 
 
 
 
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment