THE RAND CONTINUOUS 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION POLL

The RAND Continuous 2012 Presidential Election Poll (CPEP) was conducted within the American Life Panel, an Internet panel recruited through traditional probability sampling to ensure representativeness. Because the CPEP asks the same respondents repeatedly about their voting preferences, observed c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Public opinion quarterly 2014-01, Vol.78 (S1), p.233-254
Main Authors: GUTSCHE, TANIA L., KAPTEYN, ARIE, MEIJER, ERIK, WEERMAN, BAS
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Election forecasting
Election results
Obama, Barack
Opinion polls
Polls
Predictions
Preferences
Presidential elections
Public opinion
Romney, W Mitt
Sampling techniques
Statistical significance
Studies
Voter behavior
Voter registration
Voting
Voting behavior
Voting precincts
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The RAND Continuous 2012 Presidential Election Poll (CPEP) was conducted within the American Life Panel, an Internet panel recruited through traditional probability sampling to ensure representativeness. Because the CPEP asks the same respondents repeatedly about their voting preferences, observed changes are attributable primarily to individuals changing their minds and not to random sampling fluctuations. The CPEP asks respondents to state in terms of percent chance both their preferences for a candidate and the likelihood that they will vote. Moreover, we asked the respondents about their actual voting after the election, so we can study the predictive power both within sample and out of sample (the national results). The CPEP appears to have predicted well. Our final prediction of the difference in popular vote between Obama and Romney differed about half a percentage point from the final tally, which would place it near or at the top of the polling firms. The probabilistic questions, even months before the election, were strongly related to actual voting behavior. Our approach allows us to gain insights into stability of voting preferences and the effect of events on individual preferences; for example, various shifts can be clearly related to major events.
ISSN:0033-362X
1537-5331
DOI:10.1093/poq/nfu009