<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Perils of Polling</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vermontnewsguy.com/the-perils-of-polling/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vermontnewsguy.com/the-perils-of-polling</link>
	<description>Real News for Real Vermonters</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:59:26 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: gnomony</title>
		<link>http://www.vermontnewsguy.com/the-perils-of-polling/comment-page-1#comment-51</link>
		<dc:creator>gnomony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 12:30:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vermontnewsguy.com/?p=442#comment-51</guid>
		<description>&quot;Had the questions just asked about &#039;health programs for low-income people&#039;  without mentioning the popular Dr. Dyanasaur and Catamount Health &#039;brands,&#039; the results might have been different.&quot;

True. But the question as phrased has its relevance and integrity.  1) Legislators aren&#039;t faced with cutting back &quot;health programs for low-income people&quot; as some sort of abstract policy decision, they are specifically faced with cutting funding for these two popular brands. 2) I suspect that it is easier to deceive a poll respondent (intentionally or unintentionally) with an abstraction than with a concrete example. The ability for a respondent to recognize the personal and political significance of the question is likely to be enhanced by mentioning the recognizable brands.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Had the questions just asked about &#8216;health programs for low-income people&#8217;  without mentioning the popular Dr. Dyanasaur and Catamount Health &#8216;brands,&#8217; the results might have been different.&#8221;</p>
<p>True. But the question as phrased has its relevance and integrity.  1) Legislators aren&#8217;t faced with cutting back &#8220;health programs for low-income people&#8221; as some sort of abstract policy decision, they are specifically faced with cutting funding for these two popular brands. 2) I suspect that it is easier to deceive a poll respondent (intentionally or unintentionally) with an abstraction than with a concrete example. The ability for a respondent to recognize the personal and political significance of the question is likely to be enhanced by mentioning the recognizable brands.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

