3 ms·
Whether there are techniques is irrelevant, whether people trust that they'll not face consequences due to their answer is much more important. You can reassure
by pergadad 8y ago
Whether there are techniques is irrelevant, whether people trust that they'll not face consequences due to their answer is much more important. You can reassure them as much as you want - who really would want to risk real-world consequences for a random survey?
Alternatively there might be somewhere in the fine print how Chinese participants were invited/selected - it wouldn't be the first such data where PRC manages to manipulate the sampled group to get a positive result (see eg PISA).
- wenc 8y ago> who really would want to risk real-world consequences for a random survey? Why not? We don't know the baseline behavior and expectations of the respondents. I think we differ on where our subjective Bayesian priors are situated. I'm more at the 50/50 mark in that I think the results could be biased but at the same time, there's no necessity that they must be. Whereas most people on this thread automatically assume a priori that the survey results surely are biased, because China.