Now on ScienceBlogs: That Which I Sowed in Tears, I Now Reap in Joy: A Love Letter to my Beautiful Readers

Seed Media Group

Search

Profile

Matthew C. Nisbet, Ph.D, is a professor in the School of Communication at American University where his research focuses on the intersections between science, media, and politics. E-MAIL: nisbetmc@gmail.com

Wikio - Top Blogs - Sciences

Comment Policy

Upcoming Talks

Sci-Comm Journals

Media Agenda-Setters

UK, Canada, & Australia

News Wires

Social Media to Watch

Science Podcasts

Research Centers

Media & Culture

« Methods 101: Why the NH Polls Were Wrong | Main | AU Students Cover Young Voters & Activists in NH »

Or Was it the Bradley Effect?

Category: 2008 Election
Posted on: January 9, 2008 9:00 AM, by Matthew C. Nisbet

One other possible explanation for the inaccurate NH poll predictions is the so-called Bradley Effect. Below is part of the discussion at Slate, a hypothesis that Krosnick is then quoted as doubting:

This sort of jarring of our expectations conjures up past examples of black candidates who have polled significantly higher than their white opponents, only to confront a very different reality when the votes are counted. Pollsters know this as the "Bradley Effect," christened for former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, a black man who narrowly lost the 1982 California gubernatorial election to a white opponent even though Bradley led in the polls. (It's sometimes also referred to as the "Wilder Effect," after Douglas Wilder, who had been polling at 10 points ahead of Marshall Coleman in the 1989 governor's race, beat Coleman by less than a point.) Harold Ford Jr., who lost his bid for a Senate seat in Tennessee in 2006, also polled better than he performed.

One theory is that voters contacted by pollsters are more likely to say they support a black candidate running against a white candidate out of desire to seem progressive. Social psychologists called this "social desirability" - the urge to act in ways that one believes his or her environment finds appropriate.

In a February 2007 article, the Pew Research Center noted that this effect was decidedly less pronounced in 2006. While black candidates lost four of five statewide races against white opponents, the polling tended to reflect this. "Taken together," it states, "the accuracy of the polling in these five biracial elections suggests that the problems that bedeviled polling in the 1980s and early 1990s may no longer be so serious."

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/60807

Comments

1

The reverse of that would also explain Obama's unexpected success in Iowa -- the social pressure to seem progressive might be accentuated when your vote is known to your neighbors.

Posted by: Dave Munger | January 9, 2008 9:20 AM

2

No is the short and clear answer.

Posted by: Coturnix | January 9, 2008 9:36 AM

3

This WAS not the Bradley effect

For this to be the Bradley effect, we would have to believe that NH women are much more racist than NH men, since Obama handily won the male vote and but lost big among women.

Of course, this would go against the research on racism that suggests that women are much more tolerant of minority candidates than men.

Posted by: erik | January 9, 2008 11:01 AM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM