This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Larson, S. G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Misunderstanding Margin of Error

Network News Coverage of Polls during the 2000 General Election

For years, scholars have documented the frequency to which the margin of error is provided in news reports of polls. What has not been systematically analyzed is whether the stories that report margin of error use this information correctly to interpret and present poll results. This study examines poll reporting on the network evening news during the 2000 presidential general election. Of the seventy-eight stories that reported findings from specific polls, forty-five (55 percent) included information about the sampling error. For the stories in which the accuracy of horse-race declarations could be assessed by the data used in the story, 47 percent were "inaccurate" because they misused the term statistical dead heat, claimed that one candidate was ahead when the results were within the margin of error (and not qualified as such), or said that the results were "outside of the margin of error" when they were not. These mistakes were most prevalent on NBC. Some of these inaccurate reports revealed a fundamental misunderstanding about what plus or minus means. As a result, changes in likely voters’ preferences were exaggerated during the general election campaign.

The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, Vol. 8, No. 1, 66-80 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/1081180X02238785


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?