The last couple of months has been the season of opinion polls. Psephologists, astrologers and sundry television experts have been trying to foresee the results of the election. There has been a lot of controversy as well about the veracity of these opinion polls, with questions being raised on how these polls are conducted and funded. It is rather intuitive that results of opinion polls can have a prejudicial impact on voting, but it seemed that the effect is even stronger in the 'first past the post' voting system that we use vis-a-vis proportional representation systems used in other democracies. Suffice to say that I started off with the rather simple intent of finding more about opinion polls, how they are conducted and the nature of their impact on voter behavior only to come to the conclusion that some basic understanding of the theory of democracy would be necessary before going any forward. It is evidently a very deep subject, and the idea is to skim it at a sufficiently high level.
The graphic below describes the different forms of government based on the source of power and the system of governance
A deeper understanding of the differences and the pros and cons of these forms of democracy is both interesting and important given the current debate in the country. When the 'aam aadmi' proclaims the the demand for 'poorna swaraj', at the face of it, what they seem to be asking for is direct democracy. Similarly there have been strong currents which give this current election the look of a presidential race. Our founding fathers chose the current form of government after much deliberation - perhaps better understanding of these reasons is needed, before we even consider quick remedies.
Within representative democracy there are multiple voting systems which are essentially different methods that voters can use to make a choice between options.The figure below details out some of the most prevalent ones
Again since the first past the post system is what is followed in this country it perhaps makes sense to get deeper into some of its pitfalls. Some of the strongest criticism of the FPTP system is that it encourages tactical voting - where voters have the incentive to vote for one who they believe is likely to win, though they might have preferred someone else so as not to 'waste' their vote. In essence in the first past the post system voters optimize between preference and winnability. Examples of tactical voting can be seen across multiple elections in India - So in UP across multiple state elections now the Brahmans have voted tactically for BSP even though their preferred party is the BJP, and in the recent Delhi state elections many people did not vote for the AAP because they did not want to 'waste' their vote on a party that has little chance of winning.
This is where the media and opinion polls have the potential to have a particularly insidious effect. By creating a halo effect and a buzz that a certain party is winning, a serious disincentive is created to vote for anyone other than the winner or the next serious contender. In a FPTP system the media and opinion polls can influence the way individuals think, by creating a perception of what the collective is thinking , and eventually change the way the collective will act by influencing the individuals that make it, kind of like a self fulfilling prophesy.
An example will perhaps come in handy. Lets consider a voter in UP whose first preference is the BSP but has voted for the BJP in the past. If the media and opinion polls convince him that there is a wave in favor of the BJP, this person is likely to switch allegiance so as to not let is vote get wasted. Entire communities can switch tactically in a similar way. The caveat here is that this can work both ways, for example now if we consider a typical SP voter who has a strong aversion for the BJP - the perception for such a wave may make him vote tactically for the party most likely to beat them and hence have the effect of consolidating the opposition.
Apart from the effect of the perception created by media and opinion polls on voter behavior which prima facie does not look very desirable, it perhaps makes sense to take a look at the success rate of these polls. "Not very good" should sum it up. Multiple times in the recent past these opinion polls have gone horribly wrong, most notably in 2004. India is in some sense, a psephologists dream and worst nightmare rolled into one. As a democracy it is incredibly large, diverse and complex. Just to get a large enough sample that can represent the 800 odd million voters is a challenge in the first place, and a sampling error is introduced right there. The other big challenge is to convert the vote shares to seats. Given the multi-party nature of the contest more than half the constituencies see multi-cornered contests where simple mathematical approximations like rule of cubes do not apply. Other measures like index of opposition unity sound obsolete given that its premise is that of the Congress as the default party of choice, something that most people will agree is not true this time. Then, the dynamic is very different in each of the states and even within some of the larger ones, with multiple political parties and myriad castes and sub castes. So even with the most honest intentions and the best tools and methodologies it is still something like gazing into a crystal ball.
What has been a bit disturbing in the last couple of months has been the finality and the confidence with which these have been presented. As if the results have been declared already on the news channels. Some humility is called for especially given the track record. Caveats need to be stated candidly, explicitly and frequently especially given the possibility of influencing outcomes in our electoral system. Then again, has this country not seen this movie before, maybe caveats are not needed.
The graphic below describes the different forms of government based on the source of power and the system of governance
A deeper understanding of the differences and the pros and cons of these forms of democracy is both interesting and important given the current debate in the country. When the 'aam aadmi' proclaims the the demand for 'poorna swaraj', at the face of it, what they seem to be asking for is direct democracy. Similarly there have been strong currents which give this current election the look of a presidential race. Our founding fathers chose the current form of government after much deliberation - perhaps better understanding of these reasons is needed, before we even consider quick remedies.
Within representative democracy there are multiple voting systems which are essentially different methods that voters can use to make a choice between options.The figure below details out some of the most prevalent ones
Again since the first past the post system is what is followed in this country it perhaps makes sense to get deeper into some of its pitfalls. Some of the strongest criticism of the FPTP system is that it encourages tactical voting - where voters have the incentive to vote for one who they believe is likely to win, though they might have preferred someone else so as not to 'waste' their vote. In essence in the first past the post system voters optimize between preference and winnability. Examples of tactical voting can be seen across multiple elections in India - So in UP across multiple state elections now the Brahmans have voted tactically for BSP even though their preferred party is the BJP, and in the recent Delhi state elections many people did not vote for the AAP because they did not want to 'waste' their vote on a party that has little chance of winning.
This is where the media and opinion polls have the potential to have a particularly insidious effect. By creating a halo effect and a buzz that a certain party is winning, a serious disincentive is created to vote for anyone other than the winner or the next serious contender. In a FPTP system the media and opinion polls can influence the way individuals think, by creating a perception of what the collective is thinking , and eventually change the way the collective will act by influencing the individuals that make it, kind of like a self fulfilling prophesy.
An example will perhaps come in handy. Lets consider a voter in UP whose first preference is the BSP but has voted for the BJP in the past. If the media and opinion polls convince him that there is a wave in favor of the BJP, this person is likely to switch allegiance so as to not let is vote get wasted. Entire communities can switch tactically in a similar way. The caveat here is that this can work both ways, for example now if we consider a typical SP voter who has a strong aversion for the BJP - the perception for such a wave may make him vote tactically for the party most likely to beat them and hence have the effect of consolidating the opposition.
Apart from the effect of the perception created by media and opinion polls on voter behavior which prima facie does not look very desirable, it perhaps makes sense to take a look at the success rate of these polls. "Not very good" should sum it up. Multiple times in the recent past these opinion polls have gone horribly wrong, most notably in 2004. India is in some sense, a psephologists dream and worst nightmare rolled into one. As a democracy it is incredibly large, diverse and complex. Just to get a large enough sample that can represent the 800 odd million voters is a challenge in the first place, and a sampling error is introduced right there. The other big challenge is to convert the vote shares to seats. Given the multi-party nature of the contest more than half the constituencies see multi-cornered contests where simple mathematical approximations like rule of cubes do not apply. Other measures like index of opposition unity sound obsolete given that its premise is that of the Congress as the default party of choice, something that most people will agree is not true this time. Then, the dynamic is very different in each of the states and even within some of the larger ones, with multiple political parties and myriad castes and sub castes. So even with the most honest intentions and the best tools and methodologies it is still something like gazing into a crystal ball.
What has been a bit disturbing in the last couple of months has been the finality and the confidence with which these have been presented. As if the results have been declared already on the news channels. Some humility is called for especially given the track record. Caveats need to be stated candidly, explicitly and frequently especially given the possibility of influencing outcomes in our electoral system. Then again, has this country not seen this movie before, maybe caveats are not needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment