Dear Editor,
With regards to Anand Persaud’s query, ‘Concerned about poll published in SN’ (SN, 10.5.08) the poll interviewed 890 people at random. The interviews were conducted by myself and several other people who were employed to collect the data. They were paid to carry out the interviews.
The same procedure was used in previous polls conducted by NACTA. Some of the individuals used in this latest survey were utilized in earlier surveys. I was satisfied with their work.
The poll was conducted using standard intercept contact methodology – the same method NACTA and all pollsters have employed in Guyana since 1989 and throughout the Caribbean since polls have been conducted. Polls in third world countries also utilize the same methodology. Most recently, the Republican Institute of the USA used the same method to determine the outcome of the election in Pakistan.
Clearly the poll is not connected with any political party and that point was established in the publication of the findings. I wish to caution Dr Persaud that a poll does monitor the political wind by giving an indication of how well parties or candidates are doing in terms of popular support.
With regards to sampling or margin of error, a poll is analyzed by social scientists at a 95% significance level. There is a formula that is used to calculate the margin of error which produced an error of about 4%.
I was stunned to read that Dr Persaud queried why the poll findings (on Guyana’s politics) are published in a newspaper in Guyana and not a refereed journal. I wonder if Dr Persaud asked Gallup, Quinnipiac, Marist and the dozens of other pollsters why their polls are published in the American newspapers and not journals. Surely Dr Persaud must know the poll was conducted for the consumption of Guyanese and not a handful of academics.
The poll was not conducted for an academic journal. However, the findings can be used for social science articles that can be published in journals. I thank Dr Persaud for his recommendation for considering publishing the findings in an academic journal.
Dr Persaud seems to know a lot about surveys. I will recommend that he seriously consider conducting surveys in Guyana and submit them to life (or social science) journals for the benefit of readers in the international community, particularly academics. Such a poll would greatly benefit Guyanese.
Dr Persaud posed several questions about the poll and before he could obtain answers, he passed judgment that the poll “is not good.” As a scientist, Dr Persaud should know better. He should offer evidence when discrediting the poll. I do not know on what basis he condemns the poll. I wish to note that similar negativities were used to discredit NACTA’s polls prior to elections in Guyana and Trinidad. But the polls’ findings were on target.
Yours faithfully,
Vishnu Bisram
