Journal article
Missing nonvoters and misweighted samples: explaining the 2015 great British polling miss
- Abstract:
-
Preelection polls for the 2015 UK General Election missed the final result by a considerable margin: underestimating the Conservative Party and overestimating Labour. Analyzing evidence for five theories of why the polls missed using British Election Study (BES) data, we find limited evidence for systematic vote intention misreporting, late swing, systematically different preferences among “don’t knows,” or differential turnout of parties’ supporters. By comparing the BES face-to-face probabi...
Expand abstract
- Publication status:
- Published
- Peer review status:
- Peer reviewed
Actions
Access Document
- Files:
-
-
(Accepted manuscript, pdf, 1.7MB)
-
- Publisher copy:
- 10.1093/poq/nfx015
Why is the content I wish to access not available via ORA?
Bibliographic data (the information relating to research outputs) and full-text items (e.g. articles, theses, reports, etc.) arrive in ORA from several different sources. Unfortunately we are not able to make available the full-text for every research output.
Please contact the ORA team (
) if you have queries regarding unavailable content OR if you are aware of a full-text copy we can make available.
) if you have queries regarding unavailable content OR if you are aware of a full-text copy we can make available.
Content may be unavailable for the following four reasons
-
Version unsuitable
-
We have not obtained a suitable full-text for a given research output. See this page for more information.
-
Recently completed
-
Sometimes content is held in ORA but is unavailable for a fixed period of time to comply with the policies and wishes of rights holders.
-
Permissions
-
All content made available in ORA should comply with relevant rights, such as copyright. See this page for more information.
-
Clearance
-
Some thesis volumes scanned as part of the digitisation scheme funded by Dr Leonard Polonsky are currently unavailable due to sensitive material or uncleared third-party copyright content. We are attempting to contact authors whose theses are affected.
Alternative access to the full-text
You may be able to access the full-text directly from the publisher's website using the 'Publisher Copy' link in the 'Links & Downloads' box from a research output's ORA record page. This method may require an institutional or individual subscription to the journal/resource.
Authors
Bibliographic Details
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press Publisher's website
- Journal:
- Public Opinion Quarterly Journal website
- Volume:
- 81
- Issue:
- 3
- Pages:
- 661–687
- Publication date:
- 2017-05-24
- Acceptance date:
- 2016-08-12
- DOI:
- EISSN:
-
1537-5331
- ISSN:
-
0033-362X
- Source identifiers:
-
643715
Item Description
- Pubs id:
-
pubs:643715
- UUID:
-
uuid:0483c1c0-2302-4bb1-89e9-b52ba6287c6a
- Local pid:
- pubs:643715
- Deposit date:
- 2016-09-14
Terms of use
- Copyright holder:
- Mellon and Prosser
- Copyright date:
- 2017
- Notes:
- Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. This is the accepted manuscript version of the article. The final version is available online from Oxford University Press at: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfx015
If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record