What on Earth do you mean? First, the vast majority of China is on the internet, secondly there are non-internet methods of polling. Here’s the source, and the relevant section for how they took the data:
The survey team set out to assess overall satisfaction levels with government among respondents from across the socioeconomic and geographic strata of China. “It is always a challenge to obtain a representative sample of the Chinese population, particularly from interior provinces,” said Turiel. “Our survey does not include migrant laborers, for example. But given the fact that the survey conducted in-person interviews with over 3,000 respondents per year in a purposive stratified sample, we are happy that the results include not just the coastal elites or large urban areas, but also poorer and less developed inland provinces.”
That is by far the least satisfying study I’ve ever heard. 32000 people surveyed over 13 years. That’s essentially 3.5 people per city in China. How are we to take that as a valid survey?
This isn’t 32000 in 1 wave, though. This is ~2500 a year over 13 years. Even the answers given at the beginning of the study could have changed wildly if the same people had been polled at the end. And even if not, 4 people per city is not representative of an entire city at any given moment of time.
What demographics in China did they poll each year? Did they poll people of different racial profiles? Did they poll uyhgurs? Were the candidates selected randomly or were the assigned by the government? If the latter, were they coached or paid? Any number of things could throw off that study.
You’re free to read into the study itself more and call the ones who took it up to ask. The fact of the matter is that, statistically, the study is sound and can be trusted to be accurate.
What on Earth do you mean? First, the vast majority of China is on the internet, secondly there are non-internet methods of polling. Here’s the source, and the relevant section for how they took the data:
Emphasis mine.
That is by far the least satisfying study I’ve ever heard. 32000 people surveyed over 13 years. That’s essentially 3.5 people per city in China. How are we to take that as a valid survey?
I suggest you read up on statistics, 32000 is quite enough for a sample size. 95% of 32000 answering anything is immensely consistent.
This isn’t 32000 in 1 wave, though. This is ~2500 a year over 13 years. Even the answers given at the beginning of the study could have changed wildly if the same people had been polled at the end. And even if not, 4 people per city is not representative of an entire city at any given moment of time.
What demographics in China did they poll each year? Did they poll people of different racial profiles? Did they poll uyhgurs? Were the candidates selected randomly or were the assigned by the government? If the latter, were they coached or paid? Any number of things could throw off that study.
You’re free to read into the study itself more and call the ones who took it up to ask. The fact of the matter is that, statistically, the study is sound and can be trusted to be accurate.