Results interpretation

The most common mistake when reading data of an electoral survey is to disclose rising or falling tendency of a given candidate based on minor result differences, which statically do not characterize tendency.

It is only possible to reach the conclusion that a candidate is rising or falling if it occurs for various consecutive accrual periods, and at least three of them towards the same direction.

Example: in a sequence of 5 surveys, if candidate A respectively registers 32%, 30%, 31%, 29% and 30% of voting intents, it is not possible to state that there is a rising or falling tendency: results oscillation is within the survey error margins. If said candidate had reached 32%, 33%, 34%, 36% and 38%, although the differences are within the surveys error margins, in this case would be indicating a rising tendency.

Thus, to state without mistake that a certain candidate is rising or falling, it is necessary to review the performance evolution in a series of surveys and not only compare separately the current survey to the previous one.


 Related News

IBOPE Intelligence points correctly 95% of votes in first round
In all, were voting intention estimates 400 to prefects in 52 municipalities in the country.
Surprises are inevitable
Surprises are inevitable.


 Related Products

Monitors the evolution of the image of the municipal administration.
Measures the perception people have of a candidate.
Directs and appropriate communication strategies and direction of the campaign.
Measure the potential of an application.
Online Purchase
In the online store, it is possible to more easily purchase research reports regarding the use of internet in Brasil, or even request a customized study to the customer assistance team on different topics.