Haha, you really don't know much about survey research do you? You can't infer the position of those that do not respond, as you do here, nor is response rate an issue unless response is itself endogenous and indicates bias. An anonymous survey can't get you fired. So strike three on that one.
go back and reread my response. I did not infer anything. Your survey is useless and is an embarrassment to survey takers everywhere.
Maybe I do, but in fairness how else would those of you on the right understand me if I didn’t? A simple thank you would suffice.
Your inference: Those people that did not respond were not surveyed and there is no indication that response is correlated with position. It is pretty clear you have absolutely no idea about survey research.
Well, I’m not on the right, but I do appreciate the fact that you recognize that those people on the right are able to confirm your own answer to your initial question. Self awareness is a virtue.
I don’t think you were able to grasp the meaning of the term inference. Let’s analyze what you posted, and what I said. Here is the data from your survey. 5000 doctors were surveyed. Of the 5000 surveyed, only 229 agreed with the CDC vaccine recommendation. My assertion was less than 6% of the Drs surveyed agreed with the CDC. 229 of 5000 is about 4.5%. So my assertion was factual and accurate. You are trying assert that 229 out of 275 responses shows the Drs overwhelmingly endorse the CDC. But that is not what I said, which should be obvious because I emphasized how useless the survey is because of the dismissal response, which I suggested may be attributable to political retribution—with citations to authority.
LOL. I literally spelled out the data for you. Did I misrepresent the data? Was my math faulty? I did not convey my understanding of the survey, I pointed out the data. The only conclusion I made was mathematical. The problem is you cited a shitty source which offers no supports for your position. Try harder next time.
Here is your logic. Let’s imagine you are having a Fourth of July picnic and invite 20 family groups. Each family group has five members, with a total of 100 guest. You send out an email to the 20 family groups asking them what they want to eat at your Fourth of July party. Your 4 children respond to you and tell you they want gummy bears and ice cream. Nobody else responds to you. Under your logic, everyone is going to show up to your Fourth of July picnic and be surprised that they are having gummy bears and ice cream as their only food choice. When asked, you are going to say you took a survey and 100% of the people asked for gummies and ice cream. Your Fourth of July party is a failure, just like your argument.
In statistics and research, we call that an inference. Statistical inference - Wikipedia And, again, you have no idea that there is anything wrong with that response rate. The only reason response rate would matter is if there was endogenous selection into the sampled population.
That would be a great example of the endogenous selection mdgator referenced. Is there any evidence of endogenous selection in this survey? How does the response rate in this survey compare to other similar surveys?
Reading comprehension is a lost art. You quoted my whole paragraph and claim I am drawing an inference on the vaccine acceptance by medical professions. Be more specific. The only thing I write which could be remotely considered an inference is the correlation between the lack of response to the survey and the history of health care providers losing their job for disagreeing with the CDC, which, by inference, you could conclude that the lack of response would disfavor the CDC position. BUT- I did not make an inference, I posed questions. Further, I am no expert, but I believe endogenous selection has no application to the issue raised. As I understand that term, this issue (bias) occurs in the SELECTION of the units (in this case the 5000 Drs who got the survey) (hence the inclusion of the word “selection” in the term) and has nothing to do with issues which may arise on WHICH units respond. (Which we are discussing here) You sound like the expert in this field, so correct me if I’m wrong. I am always interested in learning new things. However, regardless, if this type of bias was present in the study, doesn’t it support the notion that the study itself is likely useless? So, at the end of the day, does it really make any difference on the final conclusion?
