|
Post by ridge on Jun 18, 2013 22:44:09 GMT -5
Surveys are instruments used to determine representative data. Quantitatively they are defined by something called a confidence interval which speaks to the minimum amount of surveys needed to fit the requirement of what a survey needs to be for a certain population. However when this is narrowly defined such as in the NW proposal and even much more so in the LP DMI, the survey becomes near zero in significant importance which means it probably isn't worth the paper with which it is written. Surveys are intended to cover the demographics (or most of them) for which they represent. The fewer the number of surveys for an increasingly larger geographical area or population and this requirement becomes increasingly impossible.
Why would anyone use such a survey as the ones described above? They are simply more easily manipulated. The probability for some type of corruption increases as the number of surveys decreases. A predetermined outcome can be obtained.
Such types of surveys are also cheaper if one does not have a concerned interest in getting quality results. There may be other purposes in using such surveys such as creating public relations, creating false impressions, and creating behavior based on false results. Usually such instruments are self-serving and offer almost nothing from the stand point of usable data that was collected. Honesty is sacrificed for other internal goals.
|
|
|
Post by daappleknocker on Jun 19, 2013 7:24:56 GMT -5
Dennis, what an interesting post. You have put eloquently in words what I have been thinking all along. Thanks.
|
|