2 ms·
My argument wasn't that there shouldn't be revisions though, only that recent years have shown consistent negative revisions rather then a roughly even distribu
by _heimdall 7mo ago
My argument wasn't that there shouldn't be revisions though, only that recent years have shown consistent negative revisions rather then a roughly even distribution.
If response rates are down or something else is making surveys more difficult, its reasonable that confidence windows would weaken and size of revisions would increase. Its unreasonable that difficulty in surveying would lead to a consistent bias in results though, that's a methodological issue at best.
- throw0101c 7mo ago> My argument wasn't that there shouldn't be revisions though, only that recent years have shown consistent negative revisions rather then a roughly even distribution. It's been to too many moons since I took a prob/stats course to comment accurately on population sampling, but how valid is the assumption that errors 'should' skew both positive and negative?
- _heimdall 7mo agoIf errors are skewed in one direction there would likely have to be a factor forcing it, like sampling and response bias. That's always possible, though again I question the validity of the measure and results if its getting consistently skewed results. Either the methodology is faulty or the results simply can't be trusted because they can't reliably get good data.