One of the most widely known and important applications of probability and statistics is scientific polling to forecast election results. In 1936, Gallup predicted correctly the victory of Roosevelt over Landon in the US presidential election, using scientific sampling of 3,000 persons, whereas the Literary Digest failed using 2.4 million answers to 10 million mailed questionnaires to automobile and telephone owners. Since then, polls have grown to be a flourishing and very influential and important industry, spreading around the world. Polls have mostly been accurate in the US presidential elections, with a few exceptions. Their two most notable failures were their wrong predictions of the US 1948 and 2016 presidential elections. Most polls failed too in the 2016 UK Referendum, in the 2014 and 2019 India Lok Sabha elections, and in the US 2020 presidential election, even though in the latter three they did predict the winner. We discuss these polls in the present paper. The failure in 1948 was due to non-random sampling. In 2016 and 2020 it was mainly due to the problem of non-response and possible biases of the pollsters. In 2014 and 2019 it was due to non-response and political biases of the polling agencies and news outlets that produced the polls.
翻译:1936年,盖洛普正确地预测了罗斯福在美国总统选举中胜过兰登(Landon)的胜利,使用了3000人的科学抽样,而文学文摘则未能使用400万个对汽车和电话所有者邮寄的1 000万份调查问卷的答案。从那时以来,民意测验已发展成为一个繁荣、影响极大和重要的行业,遍及世界各地。民意测验大多在美国总统选举中是准确的,只有少数例外。其两个最显著的失败是他们对美国1948年和2016年总统选举的错误预测。多数民意测验在2016年英国公投、2014年和2019年印度洛克萨巴选举以及2020年美国总统选举中也失败,尽管后三个人对获胜者作了预测。我们在本文中讨论了这些民意测验。1948年的失败是非随机抽样造成的。在2016年和2020年,这主要是由于民意测验者不回应和可能的偏见问题。在2014年和2019年,其原因是投票机构和制作民意测验的新闻站没有回应和政治偏见。