IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/statpp/v8y2017i1p65-84n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Roosevelt Predicted to Win: Revisiting the 1936 Literary Digest Poll

Author

Listed:
  • Lohr Sharon L.
  • Brick J. Michael

    (Westat, 1600 Research Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20850, USA)

Abstract

The Literary Digest poll of 1936, which incorrectly predicted that Landon would defeat Roosevelt in the 1936 US presidential election, has long been held up as an example of how not to sample. The sampling frame was constructed from telephone directories and automobile registration lists, and the survey had a 24% response rate. But if information collected by the poll about votes cast in 1932 had been used to weight the results, the poll would have predicted a majority of electoral votes for Roosevelt in 1936, and thus would have correctly predicted the winner of the election. We explore alternative weighting methods for the 1936 poll and the models that support them. While weighting would have resulted in Roosevelt being projected as the winner, the bias in the estimates is still very large. We discuss implications of these results for today’s low-response-rate surveys and how the accuracy of the modeling might be reflected better than current practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Lohr Sharon L. & Brick J. Michael, 2017. "Roosevelt Predicted to Win: Revisiting the 1936 Literary Digest Poll," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 65-84, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:statpp:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:65-84:n:4
    DOI: 10.1515/spp-2016-0006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/spp-2016-0006
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/spp-2016-0006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hjort N.L. & Claeskens G., 2003. "Frequentist Model Average Estimators," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 98, pages 879-899, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Steven N. Durlauf & Andros Kourtellos & Chih Ming Tan, 2012. "Is God in the details? A reexamination of the role of religion in economic growth," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(7), pages 1059-1075, November.
    2. Laha, A. K. & Putatunda, Sayan, 2017. "Travel Time Prediction for Taxi-GPS Data Streams," IIMA Working Papers WP 2017-03-03, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    3. Wan, Alan T.K. & Zhang, Xinyu & Zou, Guohua, 2010. "Least squares model averaging by Mallows criterion," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 277-283, June.
    4. Sun, Yuying & Hong, Yongmiao & Lee, Tae-Hwy & Wang, Shouyang & Zhang, Xinyu, 2021. "Time-varying model averaging," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(2), pages 974-992.
    5. Wright, Jonathan H., 2008. "Bayesian Model Averaging and exchange rate forecasts," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 329-341, October.
    6. Doppelhofer, G. & Weeks, M., 2005. "Jointness of Growth Determinants," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0542, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    7. Haili Zhang & Guohua Zou, 2020. "Cross-Validation Model Averaging for Generalized Functional Linear Model," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-35, February.
    8. Ethan Cohen-Cole & Steven Durlauf & Jeffrey Fagan & Daniel Nagin, 2008. "Model Uncertainty and the Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 11(2), pages 335-369.
    9. Raffaella Giacomini & Toru Kitagawa & Alessio Volpicella, 2017. "Uncertain identification," CeMMAP working papers CWP18/17, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    10. Romain Duval & Davide Furceri & Jakob Miethe, 2021. "Robust political economy correlates of major product and labor market reforms in advanced economies: Evidence from BAMLE for logit models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(1), pages 98-124, January.
    11. Shou-Yung Yin & Chu-An Liu & Chang-Ching Lin, 2021. "Focused Information Criterion and Model Averaging for Large Panels With a Multifactor Error Structure," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 54-68, January.
    12. Niels Haldrup & David F. Hendry & Herman K. van Dijk, 2003. "Guest Editors’ Introduction: Model Selection and Evaluation in Econometrics," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 65(s1), pages 681-688, December.
    13. Hansen, Bruce E., 2008. "Least-squares forecast averaging," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 342-350, October.
    14. Tumala, Mohammed M & Olubusoye, Olusanya E & Yaaba, Baba N & Yaya, OlaOluwa S & Akanbi, Olawale B, 2017. "Forecasting Nigerian Inflation using Model Averaging methods: Modelling Frameworks to Central Banks," MPRA Paper 88754, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Feb 2018.
    15. Shaobo Jin, 2022. "Frequentist Model Averaging in Structure Equation Model With Ordinal Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 1130-1145, September.
    16. Minsu Chang & Francis J. DiTraglia, 2020. "A Generalized Focused Information Criterion for GMM," Papers 2011.07085, arXiv.org.
    17. DiTraglia, Francis J., 2016. "Using invalid instruments on purpose: Focused moment selection and averaging for GMM," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 195(2), pages 187-208.
    18. Raffaella Giacomini & Toru Kitagawa & Alessio Volpicella, 2017. "Uncertain identification," CeMMAP working papers 18/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    19. Gerda Claeskens, 2012. "Focused estimation and model averaging with penalization methods: an overview," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 66(3), pages 272-287, August.
    20. Liu, Qingfeng, 2010. "Generalized Cp Model Averaging for Heteroskedastic Models," ビジネス創造センターディスカッション・ペーパー (Discussion papers of the Center for Business Creation) 10252/4334, Otaru University of Commerce.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:statpp:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:65-84:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.