---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <nkmg1f$pof$1@grapevine.csail.mit.edu> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 17:46:23 +0000 (UTC) From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: Are telephone surveys statistically valid? In article <20160625141731.34769.qmail@ary.lan>, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote: >>Are *any* telephone surveys statistically valid? I see a number >>of problems (even if they call land lines and cell phones): > >Probably not. The folks at the Pew Research Center still think otherwise. Although they are concerned about the non-participation rate, what it has meant is that they now have to call 20 numbers to get one survey participant rather then 5 as in the days of yore. They have released a lot of statistical information about who responds to surveys, over what modalities, and how their demographics line up with the population as a whole (as determined by the census). Of course you could argue it another way: they are "statistically valid" by construction, the only question is whether the population being sampled is sufficiently similar to the population of interest to allow for generalization. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <nkmbn9$i51$1@dont-email.me> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 11:32:12 -0500 From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> Subject: Re: Are telephone surveys statistically valid? On 6/22/2016 8:49 PM, Gordon Burditt wrote: > Question: Some low-income people (in the USA) can get a subsidized > cell phone with a limited calling package for almost nothing or > nothing. Yes. Around here, the going package seems to be about 600 minutes/month. Stupidphones (isn't that the antonym of smartphone?) that do texts, but no data. Can they still get a subsidized landline? Or does the > program give out only cell phones now? Yes but... you can't get subsidies for both. Only one line, whichever it is, per address. There's clearly some central registry, because they check. Could it be that all of the > people with subsidized phones have cell phones only? That would > be a significant bias for landline-only surveys, although there are > other biases that might partially cancel that one out. My impression (living in a poor neighborhood) is that subsidized cell phones are far more common. Possibly because their carriers actually market them. setting up tables or booths in places where poor people congregate, whereas the LECs don't tell anyone about the service. Of course, a lot of people also find cellphones more convenient, and far easier to deal with if you're moving (or don't have a permanent residence). ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20160627041617.GA21369@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 00:16:17 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: Verizon Strike: Epic Labor Standoff Ends, But What About The Future? One of the largest worker strikes in modern American history is officially over. But the fight for wireless may be just beginning. Montclair, NJ By Eric Kiefer For Verizon workers who waged one of the larger strikes in recent memory, the message it sent was as important as the concessions it gained from the company: Some things are worth fighting for, and fair treatment on the job is one of them. The assessment comes about a week after 36,500 members of the Communications Workers of America (CWA) and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Engineers (IBEW) overwhelmingly approved four-year work agreements with Verizon, which brought an end to a nearly two-month labor standoff. http://patch.com/new-jersey/montclair/verizon-strike-update-2016-workers-ratify-contracts-end-epic-labor-standoff -- Bill Horne ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Mon, 27 Jun 2016