2 Nondisclosers and their Impact on Poll Misestimations in Quebec
At any rate, this is accepted as a first important factor of the misestimations of vote intentions in Quebec and that claim is supported by the data of Table 1.
But the proportions of consistent nondisclosers are not likely to vary much from one election to the other and therefore cannot account for the fact that the misestimations at the prorata level are much larger for the two main parties in section A of Table 1, and particularly so for the Patti Quebecois.
There are a few reasons why, in order to account for poll misestimations, it is assumed that nondisclosers are more important than late shifters.
The notion of ambivalence is not new, but it has never been used to explain the misestimations of preelection polls.
Political Ambivalence and Possible Solutions to Poll Misestimations
Others have suggested adjustments to poll results when prorata allocations of the nondisclosers lead to systematic misestimations of some parties (Curtice and Sparrow, 1997; Boy and Chiche, 1999; Drouilly, 1997).
They provide a good test since in that election ambivalence was high and the misestimations tended to be large.
It is important to mention that in trying to account for misestimations in party support, a critical substantive process of theoretical significance was uncovered.
Finally, on the basis of that analysis, the paper presented new solutions to the problem of misestimations so often encountered by pollsters in their efforts to forecast party support in Quebec.
The hypotheses regarding the misestimations of popular support were supported in a detailed examination of the 1998 election (Pinard, 2003a) as well as in an analysis of the three referendums of that period in Quebec (Pinard, 2000a).
Thus between 1936 and 1972, Gallup's average misestimations were of only 2.