All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Bandwagons and Kerry vs. Bush 2004
Unformatted Document Text:  16 In the Table 4 estimates of the LAST POLL variable has been regressed on vote intention. The same controls used in estimating favorability have been used in the estimates of vote intention. The models control for sex, race, direction of party identification and the 3 variables for general media exposure. Table 4 is subdivided by education levels and Table 5 by the respondent’s subjective willingness to follow politics. As one might suspect looking across the Pseudo R^2 values of the models in Table 4, the better educated an individual is, the better our model will predict the variance in vote preferences. Looking back on original claims however, in this case our expectation for the necessary sophistication of minimal cognitive effort utility maximizers has been met exactly as predicted. The coefficients are unimodal and centered on the middle of the educational scale (some college education). Moreover, in both the lowest levels and the highest levels of educational sub-groupings the LAST POLL variable does not successfully predict a respondent’s vote intention. In the case of the three middle categories of education some further discussion is required. While both the categories of those with “High School diplomas” and those with “4 year degrees” in the table are annotated as having p-values less than .1, the statistical significance merits further discussion. The P-Value 4 for “High School” is .057, or we have a 5.7% chance of making an invalid inference from the Annenberg sample to the population of all people with a high school education and no more. Critics might say that a 5.7% chance of a Type I error in a sample of 7544 is too high to give further consideration. It is respectfully submitted that in this case it is not. The substantive impact of the variable suggests that a 10 point shift towards John Kerry in the value of LAST POLL would lead this demographic to express a 3.7% greater likelihood to support 4 P-Vaues not shown in Tables, but can of course be calculated from standard errors.

Authors: Daigle, Delton.
first   previous   Page 17 of 40   next   last



background image
16
In the Table 4 estimates of the LAST POLL variable has been regressed on vote
intention. The same controls used in estimating favorability have been used in the
estimates of vote intention. The models control for sex, race, direction of party
identification and the 3 variables for general media exposure. Table 4 is subdivided by
education levels and Table 5 by the respondent’s subjective willingness to follow politics.
As one might suspect looking across the Pseudo R^2 values of the models in
Table 4, the better educated an individual is, the better our model will predict the
variance in vote preferences. Looking back on original claims however, in this case our
expectation for the necessary sophistication of minimal cognitive effort utility
maximizers has been met exactly as predicted. The coefficients are unimodal and
centered on the middle of the educational scale (some college education). Moreover, in
both the lowest levels and the highest levels of educational sub-groupings the LAST
POLL variable does not successfully predict a respondent’s vote intention.
In the case of the three middle categories of education some further discussion is
required. While both the categories of those with “High School diplomas” and those with
“4 year degrees” in the table are annotated as having p-values less than .1, the statistical
significance merits further discussion. The P-Value
4
for “High School” is .057, or we
have a 5.7% chance of making an invalid inference from the Annenberg sample to the
population of all people with a high school education and no more. Critics might say that
a 5.7% chance of a Type I error in a sample of 7544 is too high to give further
consideration. It is respectfully submitted that in this case it is not. The substantive
impact of the variable suggests that a 10 point shift towards John Kerry in the value of
LAST POLL would lead this demographic to express a 3.7% greater likelihood to support
4
P-Vaues not shown in Tables, but can of course be calculated from standard errors.


Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 17 of 40   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.