Thursday, 02 February 2012 21:34
32 Comments
By Dave Taylor
Tory peer Lord Ashcroft commissioned a poll from YouGov on different versions of the referendum question. Three separate groups of around 1000 Scottish adults were each asked a different version of the question.
Interestingly, none of the questions allowed anyone to respond “unsure/Don’t Know”. They were “forced choice” questions, which the referendum question certainly won’t be, people won’t be forced to answer a question which Ashcroft has rigged in advance.
When the question is field tested and studied by the Electoral Commission, that is one of the critical factors that will be looked at. Does the question actually confuse people? [1]
Much has been made by Unionists that the “Do you agree” structure was “rigging” the question, so a variant was asked
“Do you agree or disagree that Scotland should be an independent country?” as well as “Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?”
There was no significant difference between the responses to these.
On the SNP wording – 41% said Yes and 59% said No. On the variant wording – 39% Agree and 61% Disagree.
However, if you look at the sub samples, support for independence rose among women and 40-59 year olds when the changed version was asked, as opposed to the original. That 2% difference is well within the margin of error on a sample of that size.
However, we know that the Unionists ARE desperate to rig the question by including an emotive phrase regarding the UK “leave/remain in the United Kingdom” in the question. The phrase is key here and Ashcroft’s poll shows why.
“Should Scotland become an independent country, or should it remain part of the United Kingdom?”
“Become an independent country” was chosen by 33%, while “Remain part of the United Kingdom” was the response of 67%
Comparing the responses to “Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country” and “Should Scotland become an independent country, or should it remain part of the United Kingdom?” produces interesting differences.
Among men, the Yes vote drops by 11%, while among women by 4%. There is virtually no difference in social class response, 7-8% in both groupings. In most age groups, there is little difference, 6-8% but among 18-24 year olds the drop is 14%.
All very interesting, but crucially, we don’t know the level of “Don’t Knows”, because Ashcroft structured the possible answers in a way that hid that crucial information!
Lord Ashcroft said “Mr Salmond is not a pollster, he is a politician. Though he is committed to asking the Scottish people whether they want independence, he is equally determined to get the answer he wants. The question is too important to be asked in such a partisan way.”
Equally, Ashcroft “is not a pollster, he is a politician”. If people didn’t understand before why it is so critical for the Scottish, as opposed to the UK Parliament, to set the question – weel, ye ken noo!
[1] The technical aspects of how the Electoral Commission looks at a referendum question are well worth a look. Click here for their report on the Welsh Referendum Question last year.
Comments
#
2012-02-03 09:40
"The technical aspects of how the Electoral Commission looks at a referendum question are well worth a look. Click here for their report on the Welsh Referendum Question last year."
3.20 After they were asked to look for any leading elements, some people identified what they thought could be leading. The main point that some people thought was leading was that the question was framed in terms of: ‘Do you agree...’‘Ydych chi’n cytuno…
6.11 People find the formulation of the question in terms of ‘Do you agree …’ to be rather leading. They felt it implies ‘Do you agree with me …’ and that it is harder to say ‘No, I do not agree’ than to say ‘Yes, I agree’. For this reason, we recommend a more neutral formulation."
3.20 After they were asked to look for any leading elements, some people identified what they thought could be leading. The main point that some people thought was leading was that the question was framed in terms of: ‘Do you agree...’‘Ydych chi’n cytuno…
6.11 People find the formulation of the question in terms of ‘Do you agree …’ to be rather leading. They felt it implies ‘Do you agree with me …’ and that it is harder to say ‘No, I do not agree’ than to say ‘Yes, I agree’. For this reason, we recommend a more neutral formulation."
#
2012-02-03 10:03
Spookily I agree with you. You can lead people down a path, but you can't force them. Both sides will try to gain advantage in the question, to suggest otherwise would be ridiculous. Also to suggest that in that booth someone will force the right answer out of you through ink on paper is equally ridiculous. The vast majority of voters on the day will have made their minds up long before putting pencil to paper.
#
2012-02-03 10:10
"The vast majority of voters on the day will have made their minds up long before putting pencil to paper."
I am afraid I do not agree and that is why the QUESTION must be neutral.
I am afraid I do not agree and that is why the QUESTION must be neutral.
#
2012-02-03 11:31
Quoting ituna semea:
Nonsense. Of course the vast majority of people will have made up their mind before they go into the polling booth. The idea that someone who is minded to vote no would change their mind when faced with the ballot question is ludicrous.
"The vast majority of voters on the day will have made their minds up long before putting pencil to paper."
I am afraid I do not agree and that is why the QUESTION must be neutral.
Nonsense. Of course the vast majority of people will have made up their mind before they go into the polling booth. The idea that someone who is minded to vote no would change their mind when faced with the ballot question is ludicrous.
#
2012-02-03 14:28
I would think that any perceived pressure applied by a 'do you agree' question is only relative when asked in person, not written on a ballot paper
#
2012-02-03 20:33
The idea that people will be persuaded en masse to abandon deeply held beliefs based on a minor rewording is ludicrous. The debate will be decided on its merits (or on feeling) but will not be determined by "agree".
#
2012-02-03 10:11
Alright, if "Do you agree . .", is a problem, why not change the question to:
"Should Scotland become an independent country?"
Works for me.
"Should Scotland become an independent country?"
Works for me.
#
2012-02-03 10:15
Well, you know, will anyone actually read the question ?
That may sound a bit trite, but I go back to the Referendum that set up the Bestest Wee Parly.
The campaign wasn't about The Question. It was about The Answer. Did anyone actually read the question before you ticked the boxes ?
There was Yes/Yes or No/No and a few going between.
There will be a Yes Campaign and a No Campaign. Hopefully.
IMHO the vast majority of people will go into the booth knowing well in advance what box they will be ticking and why.
I don't think that anyone will be swayed by What The Exact Wording of the Question is.
That may sound a bit trite, but I go back to the Referendum that set up the Bestest Wee Parly.
The campaign wasn't about The Question. It was about The Answer. Did anyone actually read the question before you ticked the boxes ?
There was Yes/Yes or No/No and a few going between.
There will be a Yes Campaign and a No Campaign. Hopefully.
IMHO the vast majority of people will go into the booth knowing well in advance what box they will be ticking and why.
I don't think that anyone will be swayed by What The Exact Wording of the Question is.
#
2012-02-03 10:37
Very much agree Chiefy. I don't even remember the question on devolution. I knew long before I got to the polling station that I wanted a parliament in Edinburgh.
#
2012-02-03 14:46
chiefy1724 2012-02-03 09:15
“I don't think that anyone will be swayed by What The Exact Wording of the Question is.”
In my opinion you are wrong. The reason the exact wording is important is: The wording on offer suggests that there is only one route to self determination.
Self-determination is the principle in international law that nations have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no external compulsion or external interference. The principle does not state how the decision is to be made, or what the outcome should be, whether it be independence, federation, protection, some form of autonomy or even full assimilation. Neither does it state what the delimitation between nations should be — or even what constitutes a nation. In fact, there are conflicting definitions and legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim the right to self-determination. Moreover, self-determination is just one of many principles applied to determining international borders.
“I don't think that anyone will be swayed by What The Exact Wording of the Question is.”
In my opinion you are wrong. The reason the exact wording is important is: The wording on offer suggests that there is only one route to self determination.
Self-determination is the principle in international law that nations have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no external compulsion or external interference. The principle does not state how the decision is to be made, or what the outcome should be, whether it be independence, federation, protection, some form of autonomy or even full assimilation. Neither does it state what the delimitation between nations should be — or even what constitutes a nation. In fact, there are conflicting definitions and legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim the right to self-determination. Moreover, self-determination is just one of many principles applied to determining international borders.
#
2012-02-03 16:12
OK then. No wiki-ing ;)
What was the wording of the questions on the '97 Referendum ?
Or the '75 European Referendum for that matter ?
I can't remember '97 and I was far too young to care in 1975. The wording of the questions were clear (I have wiki-d them) and everyone knew what a Yes or No Vote meant.
Just as a matter of interest, what OTHER route to self-determination do you see ?
What was the wording of the questions on the '97 Referendum ?
Or the '75 European Referendum for that matter ?
I can't remember '97 and I was far too young to care in 1975. The wording of the questions were clear (I have wiki-d them) and everyone knew what a Yes or No Vote meant.
Just as a matter of interest, what OTHER route to self-determination do you see ?
#
2012-02-03 16:22
chiefy1724 2012-02-03 15:12
“Just as a matter of interest, what OTHER route to self-determination do you see ?”
Read the wiki.
“Just as a matter of interest, what OTHER route to self-determination do you see ?”
Read the wiki.
#
2012-02-03 16:44
So, Either
a) You have read the appropriate wikis mentioned above ?
b) You are inviting me to read a wiki ?
c) If b), what wiki ?
I really wasn't trying to be funny or provocative or anything. I was genuinely asking what You personally, exel, see as Other Routes.
I can see a number of "other" routes to self-determination if you stretch the definition a bit, including UDI (c.f. Baltic States in Breakup of Soviet Union), Direct Intervention by International Bodies (EU/UN) to organise a referendum (c.f. East Timor, Kossovo), Secession from a Treaty of Union (c.f. Confederate States of America) and Insurrection resulting in negotiated settlement (c.f. Holland vs Spanish Empire), as well as Velvet Divorce (Czech/Slovak).
Do you agree/disagree/have another scenario to put ?
a) You have read the appropriate wikis mentioned above ?
b) You are inviting me to read a wiki ?
c) If b), what wiki ?
I really wasn't trying to be funny or provocative or anything. I was genuinely asking what You personally, exel, see as Other Routes.
I can see a number of "other" routes to self-determination if you stretch the definition a bit, including UDI (c.f. Baltic States in Breakup of Soviet Union), Direct Intervention by International Bodies (EU/UN) to organise a referendum (c.f. East Timor, Kossovo), Secession from a Treaty of Union (c.f. Confederate States of America) and Insurrection resulting in negotiated settlement (c.f. Holland vs Spanish Empire), as well as Velvet Divorce (Czech/Slovak).
Do you agree/disagree/have another scenario to put ?
#
2012-02-03 17:19
chiefy1724 2012-02-03 15:44
"So, Either
a) You have read the appropriate wikis mentioned above ?
b) You are inviting me to read a wiki ?
c) If b), what wiki ?
I really wasn't trying to be funny or provocative or anything. I was genuinely asking what You personally, exel, see as Other Routes."
I normally dislike taking a passage out of context “chiefy” but just this once for clarity.
“The principle does not state how the decision is to be made, or what the outcome should be, whether it be independence, federation, protection, some form of autonomy or even full assimilation.”
"So, Either
a) You have read the appropriate wikis mentioned above ?
b) You are inviting me to read a wiki ?
c) If b), what wiki ?
I really wasn't trying to be funny or provocative or anything. I was genuinely asking what You personally, exel, see as Other Routes."
I normally dislike taking a passage out of context “chiefy” but just this once for clarity.
“The principle does not state how the decision is to be made, or what the outcome should be, whether it be independence, federation, protection, some form of autonomy or even full assimilation.”
#
2012-02-03 10:45
"IMHO the vast majority of people will go into the booth knowing well in advance what box they will be ticking and why.
I don't think that anyone will be swayed by What The Exact Wording of the Question is."
I agree with you. I doubt that anyone will arrive at the Polling booth not knowing how they feel about the Referendum.
We have two and a half years of education to come, the biggest worry is that people switch off due to information overload.
I don't think that anyone will be swayed by What The Exact Wording of the Question is."
I agree with you. I doubt that anyone will arrive at the Polling booth not knowing how they feel about the Referendum.
We have two and a half years of education to come, the biggest worry is that people switch off due to information overload.
#
2012-02-03 10:58
How about not asking a question at all? Just three choices
Independence
Full Fiscal Autonomy
Current Devolved Settlement
or if you prefer
Current Devolved Settlement
Independence
Full Fiscal Autonomy
In any order you feel like. Or even just Independence Y/N? Any way you cut it, I can 100% guarantee you the one with the least amount of votes will be Current Devolved Settlement or No. We want change, we are ready for change and standing still for more of the same will not be the winning outcome.
Independence
Full Fiscal Autonomy
Current Devolved Settlement
or if you prefer
Current Devolved Settlement
Independence
Full Fiscal Autonomy
In any order you feel like. Or even just Independence Y/N? Any way you cut it, I can 100% guarantee you the one with the least amount of votes will be Current Devolved Settlement or No. We want change, we are ready for change and standing still for more of the same will not be the winning outcome.
#
2012-02-03 18:45
Hi Macart,
I've suggested before just have one word on the ballot paper.. INDEPENDENCE..Y/N.
That is ulikely to be agreed by the Unionists because the cant understand what Independence means, poor things.
Cameron's crew are already saying it will be Independence or nothing. IE not another step forward in devolution. They will therefore fight tooth and nail to keep FFA off the ballot paper.
The Current Devolved Settlement is what you get if you vote NO, so it is already included in Independence...Y/N
So in the end I believe the single word INDEPENDENCE leaves no doubt what the Scots want in even the dullest Westminster dunderhead, and there are a few of them going the rounds.
I've suggested before just have one word on the ballot paper.. INDEPENDENCE..Y/N.
That is ulikely to be agreed by the Unionists because the cant understand what Independence means, poor things.
Cameron's crew are already saying it will be Independence or nothing. IE not another step forward in devolution. They will therefore fight tooth and nail to keep FFA off the ballot paper.
The Current Devolved Settlement is what you get if you vote NO, so it is already included in Independence...Y/N
So in the end I believe the single word INDEPENDENCE leaves no doubt what the Scots want in even the dullest Westminster dunderhead, and there are a few of them going the rounds.
#
2012-02-03 21:19
If it was left to the unionist camp there would be no question to answer on the ballot paper,simply a box to tick which would indicate that you agree with their position.
#
2012-02-03 21:39
Jim, that would get my preference also. But much like the SG and unlike Westminster I'll wait to see what the consultation period results in. One question (my pref) two, three or half a dozen, I know which option will be on the losing end already. :0)
#
2012-02-03 18:35
I hate that politicians phrase "the vast majority", it's only in their opinion, but in this case I cant think of a better expression than "the vast majority" will know exactly how they are going to vote long before they set foot in the polling station.
#
2012-02-03 10:59
I know now that my vote will be yes to Scottish independece, no matter how the question is phrased. I have known this for years. I think most people will know which way they will vote long before polling day.
#
2012-02-03 11:49
After two years of negative scaremongering by the anti independence Parties and their Newspaper Allies,the wording Do you agree will not influence the result one iota.
#
2012-02-03 13:54
“Mr Salmond is not a pollster, he is a politician. Though he is committed to asking the Scottish people whether they want independence, he is equally determined to get the answer he wants. The question is too important to be asked in such a partisan way.”
Equally, Ashcroft “is not a pollster, he is a politician”.
And an unelected one at that, so I suggest he pipes down and leaves it to those other shining lights in that great unelected, poisoned dwarf forsyth and fooky fooks
Equally, Ashcroft “is not a pollster, he is a politician”.
And an unelected one at that, so I suggest he pipes down and leaves it to those other shining lights in that great unelected, poisoned dwarf forsyth and fooky fooks
#
2012-02-03 15:55
From the article: “Do you agree or disagree that Scotland should be an independent country?” as well as “Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?”
“There was no significant difference between the responses to these.”
You do surprise me Mr. Taylor. What was the response expected to the questions? certainly not YES/NO I would suggest.
“There was no significant difference between the responses to these.”
You do surprise me Mr. Taylor. What was the response expected to the questions? certainly not YES/NO I would suggest.
#
2012-02-03 16:38
Lord Ashcroft has been accused in the past of not paying VAT on polls he commissions in aid of the Tory party.
guardian.co.uk/.../...
So I wonder has he paid VAT on this particular poll he has commissioned?
guardian.co.uk/.../...
So I wonder has he paid VAT on this particular poll he has commissioned?
#
2012-02-03 21:22
I could say something about Belize and offshoring but would probably offend the Mods.
#
2012-02-03 22:27
My article on this Ashcroft poll took a slightly different direction.
I also noted Prof Curtis on Newsnicht last night giving Ashcrofts poll credence, and for a polling expert, I would really like to know why? If he is a polling expert, his credibility is well dodgy, after giving his support to a poll so dubious.
So what is he really at?
My article from yesterday.
Dodgy Polling .../whowhatwherewhenwhyand-how
I also noted Prof Curtis on Newsnicht last night giving Ashcrofts poll credence, and for a polling expert, I would really like to know why? If he is a polling expert, his credibility is well dodgy, after giving his support to a poll so dubious.
So what is he really at?
My article from yesterday.
Dodgy Polling .../whowhatwherewhenwhyand-how
#
2012-02-04 10:58
I find it very hard to take anything Ashcroft says seriously. He hardly plays with a straight bat himself either in anything political or with regards supporting your own country through taxation. He should return to Belize and leave us be. Unproven assertion removed - NNS Mod Team He will not have a vote regardless of the question.
#
2012-02-04 12:38
I find it very hard to take anything Ashcroft says seriously. He hardly plays with a straight bat himself either in anything political or with regards supporting your own country through taxation. He should return to Belize and leave us be. [Unproven assertion removed - NNS Mod Team] He will not have a vote regardless of the question.”
I totally agree Jim, the question of Non-Domicile’s aside, during this consultation phase of the referendum debate in my opinion we should ignore all the PARTY POLITICING and get down to discussing what is on offer post independence.
What is the GDP of Scotland going to be? Not the best guesstimate, where is the income coming from now and how much? The true figures must be available, they should be available to us.
Nobody buys into a business without audited books, why should we?
I totally agree Jim, the question of Non-Domicile’s aside, during this consultation phase of the referendum debate in my opinion we should ignore all the PARTY POLITICING and get down to discussing what is on offer post independence.
What is the GDP of Scotland going to be? Not the best guesstimate, where is the income coming from now and how much? The true figures must be available, they should be available to us.
Nobody buys into a business without audited books, why should we?
Donate to Newsnet Scotland
Latest Comments
- Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
GogsyBroon; I was a young keen engineer ... - Labour party lied over true wo...
That should have read "unprecedented". - Barclays and HSBC financing la...
See this: www.youtube.com/.../ (http://w... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
"The guy is 95, so probably doesn't even... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
And why was the McCrone Report classifie... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
Also in Campbell's report last night was... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
GogsyBroon 2013-05-21 08:16 "It's a bit ... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
it was a good interview and "relaxed and... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
We see the results of the BBC's wider me... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
Excellent interview on the Radio 4 'Toda... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
• Brian Taylor is BBC Scotland’s politic... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
An opportuntity for the Scot Gov to plan... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
No mention on BBC / unionist press of co... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
The BBC reported that Michael Moore was ... - Independence not just possible...
The SNP have to say that independence is... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
The Scottish people must realise that th... - Scotland 'guinea pig' for cuts...
Hi Abulhaq, I agree totally with your co... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
It's a sad day for the beeb in Scotland ... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
Even when the MSM do print a story of se... - Anger at BBC Scotland virtual ...
This story is critical in regards to the...