research company polls

Research Co.

Public Opinion Polls and Analysis

Canadians Regard Biden as Superior to Trump in White House

More than a quarter of Canadians think Donald Trump was the real winner of the 2020 United States presidential election. Read more Canadians Regard Biden as Superior to Trump in White House

What Do British Columbians Think About $10aDay Child Care?

Practically four-in-five British Columbians agree that employers benefit from investments in child care cause more parents can go to work. Read more What Do British Columbians Think About $10aDay Child Care?

A New Leader Would Not Make BC United More Competitive

British Columbians react well to Christy Clark and Dianne Watts, but the party would still trail the NDP and the Conservatives. Read more A New Leader Would Not Make BC United More Competitive

NDP First, Conservatives Rise, United Plummets in British Columbia

Just over a third of British Columbians who voted for the BC Liberals in 2020 are staying with BC United in 2024. Read more NDP First, Conservatives Rise, United Plummets in British Columbia

An End to Fights in Professional Hockey Seen Positively in Canada

More than three-in-four Canadians—and four-in-five hockey fans—would ban heads shots in the professional game.  Read more An End to Fights in Professional Hockey Seen Positively in Canada

A deeper dive into the latest demographic and public opinion trends. Read more Analysis

We shed a light on issues no one else has thought about. Read more What we do

In the media

How news organizations around the world feature our findings. Read more In the media

Featured Content

Featured podcast.

British Columbia Political Scene

CTV Morning Live anchor Keri Adams sits down with Research Co. President Mario Canseco to discuss the political scene in British Columbia. Watch it here.

Featured Polls

Perception of Crime Highest in Manitoba, Lowest in Saskatchewan

More than half of British Columbians and Albertans believe criminal activity has increased in the past four years…

Canadian Social Media Users Report a Worsening Experience

More than a third encountered “fake news” and more than one-in-four found racist comments or content in their feed…

Research Polls

We want your opinions, political polling.

Gather precise data that reflect the sentiments of voters, enabling you to strategically shape your campaign.

Public Opinion Polling

An essential tool for comprehending people's emotions and acquiring valuable insights into public perceptions.

Market Research

Blend consumer behavior and economic trends to confirm and improve your business idea.

Helps Solve Problems

Every difficulty that emerges in a business has the potential to bring the entire operation to a standstill, resulting in significant losses for the organization.

You have come to the right place!

Your opinion matters!

As a comprehensive market research and analytics firm, we provide research-based strategic consulting, advanced analytical support, and specialized expertise in secure, confidential online and SMS data collection for scientific market research studies.

Our benefit is your benefit. We collect your data to the rigorous quality and analyze it to provide you with helpful data. By focusing consistently on data quality and accuracy, we stay one step ahead of the competition.

100% Data Accuracy

Great user experience, quality reports.

*By entering your email you agree to receive emails

*By entering your phone number you agree to receive text messages

*When you opt-in to the service, we will send you a message to confirm your signup Message and data rates may apply. Message frequency will vary based on your use. Text “HELP” for help. Text “STOP” to cancel.

[email protected]

(833)-473-2152

508 Hendricks Isle

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

United States

SSRS Opinion Panel

• Contacted by SSRS?

Forward thinking research.

SSRS is your trusted partner for complex and challenging research problems. With the latest data collection best practices, cutting-edge survey methodologies, and an industry leading team, SSRS is breaking the mold on what research companies can do.

Providing answers you can stand behind.

SSRS Opinion Panel Products are widely renowned tools for providing accurate, multi-modal survey responses that deliver on how people think and how their opinions guide behavior. Fast and Flexible, our panels are at the forefront of our work and the foundation on which we have built our value.

Rooted in truth.

Our Encipher suite of calibration services utilizes innovative and experimentally-validated methods to reduce bias and improve data quality. A rigorously tested approach to calibrating nonprobability and hybrid data, our expansive bank of customizable calibration items offers a refreshing alternative to “one size fits all” weighting.

SSRS in the News

Polling isn’t broken, but pollsters still face trump-era challenges.

SSRS Chief Methodologist, Cameron McPhee, shares insights about the methodological challenges facing pollsters

Trust and 2024 Public Priorities for the CDC and State Health Departments

Survey Conducted by SSRS

New Marquette Law School Poll national survey finds approval of U.S. Supreme Court falls to 39%, second lowest since 2020

Episcopal health foundation releases its first-ever poll on health experiences of asian americans and pacific islanders (aapi) in texas, americans still broadly oppose overturning roe; they’re less united on what abortion laws should look like, trump maintains lead over biden in 2024 matchup as views on their presidencies diverge, luis tipan elected 2024 aapor associate inclusion and equity chair.

Term Begins May 2024

Jordon Peugh Elected 2024 AAPOR Vice President/President-Elect

Cnn poll: few think trump is being treated the same as other defendants.

CNN Poll Conducted by SSRS

Parents are feeling lonely. Here’s why it matters

CNN Health Covers New OSU Survey Conducted by SSRS

SSRS provides answers you can trust through rigorous research and relevant insights. Our focus, resolve, and passion for solving problems is relentless. We apply independent thinking to custom research solutions, combined with agile and steadfast problem-solving. When you work with the SSRS team, you have confidence in the reliability of data rooted in truth.

Our Research Areas

Public opinion & policy.

Leading the way to a well-informed society through customized research.

• Physicians and other health care providers
• Businesses owners, benefits managers, and other company health care decision makers
• Patients with a variety of health conditions and experiences
• Older adults

KFF Vaccine Monitor

Health care & health policy.

Using patient and provider experiences to build healthier communities and improve health equity.

International Health Policy Surveys

Consumer & lifestyle.

SSRS gets to the heart of what makes people tick by digging into consumer attitudes and behaviors.

• Hear the voice of the consumer
• Explore product and service development and usage
• Understand customer experience
• Discover people’s lifestyles and choices

Canada Lawn & Garden Marketplace Study

Sports & entertainment.

Snapshots into the consumer mindset through the lens of lifetime, entertainment and sports with a historical perspective.

Sports Poll

Luker lens poll, sports poll kids, 2023 tournament trends.

The latest SSRS/LoT Sports Poll infographic explores trends in college basketball fandom just in time for March Madness.

Political & Election Polling

SSRS conduct non-partisan political and election-related research research using a mix of samples, modes, and methods.

• SSRS utilizes mixed methods tailored to research needs
• SSRS links a variety of data sources to improve survey data quality
• SSRS applies an advanced use of weighting adjustments

2022 Collaborative Midterm Survey

Events and speaking engagements.

You can find the SSRS team at industry conferences and events all year long! Whether we are attending, speaking, or presenting, we look forward to connecting with you and sharing insights from our research.

Recent Insights

Who will be the next “face” of the NBA? Insights from 30 years of tracking NBA stars

Insight from Chad Menefee, Ph.D.

Perspectives on AI in Qualitative Research

Andrew Stavisky (US GAO*) and Darby Steiger (SSRS) have a conversation on AI in qualitative research.

The Public and Taxes 2024

New Research from the SSRS Opinion Panel Omnibus

The Public and Taxes

Findings from the SSRS Opinion Panel Omnibus

Baseball: A Universal Language

Melissa's Story

Athletes Make it Look Easy – We Know it’s Not

Tom's Story

A Hockey Family Bond

Jake's Story

Lifelong Passion and Community in Sports

Rich's Story

SSRS Solutions

Providing answers you can trust through rigorous research and relevant insights. SSRS tackles the most complex and challenging research questions to impact positive change.

Proprietary. Innovative. Fit for purpose. SSRS offers tailor-made research solutions designed to gather hard-to-get data and answer complex problems.

Rigorous Standards Combine Accuracy, Flexibility, and Affordability

SSRS Opinion Panel Omnibus

Perfect if You Want to Field a Short Survey or…

SSRS Virtual Insights

A Full-service Solution for Conducting Virtual Qualitative Research

SSRS Business Insights

An Innovative Source of B2B Sample

A Suite of Calibration Services Utilizing Innovative and Experimentally Validated…

Snapshots into the Consumer Mindset Through the Lens of Lifetime,…

The First and Longest Running Tracking Study Focusing on Sports…

Building the Next Generation of Sports Fans

SSRS Text Message Panel

Probability-based, Quick Turnaround Polling

SSRS ABS Innovations

Elevating Address-based Sampling to New Levels

SSRS Proprietary Panels

Highly Scalable Cost-efficient Data Collection Platform Tailored to Meet Client…

Rutgers-Eagleton/SSRS Garden State Panel

Measuring Public Opinion in New Jersey

The People Behind the Data

We know research is all about people, and it’s time to get personal. Our team of critical thinkers has genuine enthusiasm for our work and a shared goal to connect people through research. We get excited about the inherent problem solving involved in survey-based research, and our process fosters transparency through collaboration.

“Being a part of a team that genuinely enjoys working together on thought-provoking research was my goal as we built SSRS. I want to nurture a creative, innovative, supportive environment. As new challenges arise so do new opportunities for creative problem solving. It is so exciting! ” Melissa Herrmann President

“We are proud to work with clients who share our main goal: Making sure that public opinion includes the voices of people that are oftentimes under-represented in research. ” Eran Ben-Porath Chief Research Director

“We all work very hard, but we also know how to have fun together. The culture here is amazing, and I have not experienced another company like SSRS in my 20+ year market research career.” Jen Schmidt VP of Online Research and Strategy

“I enjoy helping clients use data to support their ‘why’ so they can sustainably continue to implement and or alter their own services or offerings.” Gabi Salomon Senior Project Director

“Conducting reliable public opinion research is critical not only to meet specific client objectives, but to ensure a high functioning democracy overall. I am proud to be part of that enterprise!” Jordon Peugh Chief Business Officer

Our passion for solving problems is relentless.

When you work with the SSRS team, you gain accountability-driven thoughtfulness into unpacking complex challenges. Let's start a conversation about your next project.

Find the right market research agencies, suppliers, platforms, and facilities by exploring the services and solutions that best match your needs

list of top MR Specialties

Browse all specialties

Browse Companies and Platforms

by Specialty

by Location

Browse Focus Group Facilities

Manage your listing

Follow a step-by-step guide with online chat support to create or manage your listing.

About Greenbook Directory

IIEX Conferences

Discover the future of insights at the Insight Innovation Exchange (IIEX) event closest to you

IIEX Virtual Events

Explore important trends, best practices, and innovative use cases without leaving your desk

Insights Tech Showcase

See the latest research tech in action during curated interactive demos from top vendors

Stay updated on what’s new in insights and learn about solutions to the challenges you face

Greenbook Future list

An esteemed awards program that supports and encourages the voices of emerging leaders in the insight community.

Insight Innovation Competition

Submit your innovation that could impact the insights and market research industry for the better.

Find your next position in the world's largest database of market research and data analytics jobs.

For Suppliers

Directory: Renew your listing

Directory: Create a listing

Event sponsorship

Get Recommended Program

Digital Ads

Content marketing

Ads in Reports

Podcasts sponsorship

Run your Webinar

Host a Tech Showcase

Future List Partnership

All services

Dana Stanley

Greenbook’s Chief Revenue Officer

Top Political Polling Companies

Political polling companies are vital in shaping the political landscape through surveys to understand public opinion and voter attitudes, influencing campaign strategies and policy decisions significantly. Reliable polling data is crucial for predicting election outcomes and identifying trends.

Learn more about political polling companies

Leading companies invest in refining methodologies for accurate data to guide politicians, media, and the public. Their credibility lies in transparent processes, ethical standards, and delivering clear, unbiased results. Top polling firms bridge societal divides by offering diverse and reliable data, fostering informed decision-making and democratic dialogue.

Find top political polling companies by checking out our directory listings below.

How Does the Utilization of Advanced Data Analytics Enhance Accuracy of Polling Predictions?

How has integration of technology impacted polling processes, how can political polling companies adapt to changing demographics.

Featured Experts in Top Political Polling Companies

Learning Resources

in Political Polling Firms

Service or Speciality

Advertising Agencies

Advertising Effectiveness

Advertising Research - General

Advertising Tracking

Africa / Middle East

African-American

Agile Research

Agriculture / Agribusiness

Alcoholic Beverages

Apparel / Clothing / Textiles

Association Membership

Attitude & Usage Research

Automated Market Research Platforms

B2B Research - General

Banking - Commercial

Banking - Retail

Biotechnology

Brand / product / service launch

Brand / product / service repositioning

Brand Equity

Brand Identity

Brand Image Tracking

Brand Loyalty / Satisfaction

Brand Positioning

Bulletin Boards

Business Insights

Business-to-Business

CAPI - Computer-Aided Personal Interviewing

CATI - Computer-Aided Telephone Interviewing

CX - Customer Experience

Candy / Confectionery

Cannabis / CBD

Car Clinics

Casinos / Gambling

Central Location

Chemical Industry

Claims Substantiation

College Students

Communications

Communications Strategy Research

Computer Hardware

Computer Software

Concept Development

Concept Testing

Conjoint Analysis / Trade-off/Choice Modeling

Construction Industry

Consumer Durables

Consumer Research - General

Consumer Services

Convention / Tradeshow

Copy Testing - Digital Media

Corporate Image/Identity Research

Cosmetics / Beauty Aids

Credit Cards

Customer Loyalty / Value

Customer Satisfaction

Data Analysis

Data Integration

Data Visualization & Dashboards

Doctors / Physicians

Electronics

Employee Experience & Satisfaction

Enterprise Feedback Management

Entertainment Industry

Environment & Sustainability

Ethnic Groups

Ethnography / Observational Research

Executives / Professionals

Exercise & Fitness

Field Services

Financial Industry

Financial Services Professionals

Focus Group Facility

Focus Group Facility - Non-Traditional

Focus Group Recruiting

Focus Groups

Focus Groups - International

Focus Groups - Pop-Up

Foods / Nutrition

Foreign Language

Fragrance Industry

Full Service

Gaming / Gamers

General - Healthcare

Generation X

Generation Y / Millennials

Generation Z

Global Capabilities

Global, multinational branding

HMOs / Managed Care

High Net Worth

High Technology

Hispanic / Latino

Hospital Personnel

Hospital Purchasing Agents

Hospitals / Nursing Homes

Household Products/Services

Hybrid / Mixed Methodology

IT Professionals

IVR - Interactive Voice Response

Idea Generation

In-Depth (IDI) / One-on-One

Industrial & Manufacturing

International / Multi-country

International Consumer Market Research

Internet of Things (IoT)

Investment Banking

Lawn & Garden

Legal / Lawyers

Low Incidence

Mall Intercept

Market & Competitive Intelligence

Market Opportunity Evaluation

Market Segmentation

Media Industry

Media Market Research

Medical / Health Care

Medical / Healthcare Professionals

Mobile Surveys

Mock Juries

Moderator Services

Movies / Streaming / TV

Multi-Country Studies

Multicultural

Music Tests

Mystery Shopping

NPS Measurement

North America

Nurses / Nurse Practitioners

Online - Qualitative

Online - Quantitative

Online Communities - MROC

Online Diaries / Journals / Blogs

Online Panels

Open-End / Verbatim Response Coding

Packaging Development

Packaging Testing

Panel Data Processing

Pharmaceutical - OTC Medicines

Pharmaceutical - Prescription Medicines

Pharmacists

Political Polling

Post-Launch Tracking

Preventive Healthcare

Problem Detection / Dissatisfaction

Product Development

Product Market Research

Product Testing

Professionals / Executives

Proprietary Panels

Public Opinion Research

Qualitative

Qualitative Research

Qualitative Services - General

Quantitative Research

Questionnaire / Survey Design

Questionnaire Coding

Questionnaire Design

Quick Service Restuarants (QSR)

Recruiting Research

Restaurants / Food Service

Retail Industry

Sample & Recruiting

Sample Fraud Detection & Remediation

Secondary Research / Desk Research

Segmentation

Seniors / Mature

Sentiment Analysis

Small Business / Startups / Entrepreneurs

Smart Products

Social Listening & Analytics

Social, political, non-profit goals

South America

Southeast Asia & India

Strategic Research

Streaming TV / Cable TV / Broadcast TV

Surgical Products / Medical Devices

Survey Programming

Survey Reporting and Analysis

Survey Translation

Taste Test Facility

Teenagers / Youth

Telecommunications

Test/Commercial Kitchen

Text Chat / SMS / IM Sessions

Tracking Research

Translation Services

Upper Income / Affluent

Usability Lab

User Testing

Utilities / Energy

Veterinarians

Video Conferencing

Video Management Platforms

Video Recording

Web Interviewing Systems

Western Europe

Chicago (IL--IN--WI)

Cleveland (OH)

Montreal (QC)

New York (NY--NJ--CT)

Pennsylvania

Philadelphia (PA--NJ--DE--MD)

Toronto (ON)

United States of America

Washington (DC--VA--MD)

Vendor type

Data & Analytics

Data Collection

International

Panels / Communities

Software & Technology

Support Services

Business Designation

HIPAA Compliant

Minority-Owned Business

SBE Certified

Clear filters ( 0 )

Related Specialties

Consumer Market Research

Geo-Demographic Research

Psychological / Motivational Research

Government [market sector expertise]

Compare Political Polling Firms

Cherry Hill, New Jersey

SOCIAL LINKS

Save to my lists

Featured expert

MAXimum Research

We are telephone interviewing specialists with over 300 CATI stations running the Survox (formerly CfMC) Interviewing & Internet Package w/ Hosting.

Why choose MAXimum Research

Competitive Pricing

Best Customer Service

All Industries

High Quality/Reliability

Extensive Experience

Learn more about MAXimum Research

Cleveland, Ohio

Focus Groups of Cleveland

Top rated in the Impulse survey. The largest centrally located facility in northeastern Ohio. Over 6,000 sq ft with 3 luxurious focus group suites.

Why choose Focus Groups of Cleveland

3 Suite facility

Recruiting reputation

#1 in Cleveland

Diverse database

Central location

Learn more about Focus Groups of Cleveland

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Voxco Survey Tools

Voxco is a leading omnichannel survey software that helps its users gather, measure, uncover, and act on insights generated through surveys.

Why choose Voxco Survey Tools

Fully Integrated Software

End-to-end customization

Omnichannel Surveys

Premium 24/7 Support

Real time visual reports

Learn more about Voxco Survey Tools

Chicago, Illinois

Fieldwork Network

Our specialties include local and country-wide recruiting, managing and facilitating Mock Juries, Medical / Medical Device, and Global Research.

Why choose Fieldwork Network

Recruit local & national

Expert On-line Platform

Dedicated Proj Mgmt

50 countries & counting!

Over 40 years experience

Learn more about Fieldwork Network

Potomac, Maryland

Full Circle Research

Full Circle is the proven preeminent provider of high-quality online insights, whether from our vibrant panel of millions or expert networks.

Why choose Full Circle Research

Highest-Quality Sample

Consultative Approach

In-House Panel

100% Industry Veterans

Expert Networks

Learn more about Full Circle Research

New York, New York

Based on 1 ratings

IT'S A GREAT DAY FOR DISCOVERING WHY... Researchers find Reliable and Affordable Data from Global Survey Audiences to Significantly Improve Results

Why choose OvationMR

Increase B2B Feasibility

Consultative Client Team

Less Time Cleaning Data

Extend Your Team

Grow with Confidence

Learn more about OvationMR

SIS International Research

SIS International Research, founded in 1984, is a leading full-service Market Research and Market Intelligence firm.

Why choose SIS International Research

Global Coverage

Full Service Capabilities

B2B & Industrial Research

Healthcare Research

Strategy Consulting

Learn more about SIS International Research

Singapore, Singapore

Milieu Insight

Milieu collects and analyses consumer opinions and behavioral data in real-time, delivering impactful insights at speed.

Why choose Milieu Insight

Online Proprietary Panel

Simplicity, Scale, Speed

Highly quality data

DIY survey tools

Learn more about Milieu Insight

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Ethos Market Research

Ethos MR is a leading company with a mission to uncover deep consumer and B2B insights, focused on ethnic consumer and business segments worldwide.

Why choose Ethos Market Research

Strong Panel

Ethnographic Research

Worldwide Reach

Great Pricing

Valuing Our Clients

Learn more about Ethos Market Research

Dublin, Ireland

RED C Research & Marketing Ltd

RED C are premier providers of research based consultancy. We help brands grow by clearly understanding human needs and behaviour.

Why choose RED C Research & Marketing Ltd

Partnership

Strategic Thinking

Flexibile & Responsive

Quality & Integrity

We Deliver Clarity

Learn more about RED C Research & Marketing Ltd

Newtown Square, Pennsylvania

Ricci Telephone Research, Inc.

Specialists in Market Research Data Collection.

Why choose Ricci Telephone Research, Inc.

Dedication to Quality

Learn more about Ricci Telephone Research, Inc.

Sign Up for Updates

Get the latest updates from top market research, insights, and analytics experts delivered weekly to your inbox

I agree to receive emails with insights-related content from Greenbook. I understand that I can manage my email preferences or unsubscribe at any time and that Greenbook protects my privacy under the General Data Protection Regulation.*

Your guide for all things market research and consumer insights

Create a New Listing

Manage My Listing

Find Companies

Find Focus Group Facilities

Tech Showcases

GRIT Report

Expert Channels

Get in touch

Marketing Services

Future List

Publish With Us

Privacy policy

Cookie policy

Terms of use

Copyright © 2024 New York AMA Communication Services, Inc. All rights reserved. 234 5th Avenue, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10001 | Phone: (212) 849-2752

Pew Research Center

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. It does not take policy positions. The center conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, content analysis and other data-driven social science research. It studies U.S. politics and policy; journalism and media; internet, science and technology; religion and public life; Hispanic trends; global attitudes and trends; and U.S. social and demographic trends. All of the center’s reports are available at www.pewresearch.org . Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts , its primary funder.

Charter Member of the American Association of Public Opinion Research’s Transparency Initiative .

Dataset Collection

Date ranges:.

1987-Present

Join Our Newsletter

Sign up for the Data Dive newsletter with quarterly news, data stories and more. Read our updated privacy policy here.

UPDATED Jun. 3, 2024, at 1:56 PM

Latest Polls

Check out our popular polling averages

Who’s Ahead in National Presidential Polls?

General election polling average

Do Voters Want Republicans Or Democrats In Congress?

Generic ballot polling average

How Popular Is Joe Biden?

Approval polling average

Do Americans Have A Favorable Opinion Of Donald Trump?

Favorability polling average

Who’s ahead in all?

An updating average of 2020 presidential general election polls, accounting for each poll’s quality, sample size and recency.

95% OF POLLS PROJECTED TO FALL IN THIS RANGE

Polling averages are adjusted based on state and national polls, which means candidates’ averages can shift even if no new polls have been added to this page. Read more about the methodology .

Polls ending May 30, 2024

President: general election, 2024 avg., may 28, 2024, president: general election, new york, 2024, may 27, 2024, may 25, 2024, may 24, 2024, president: general election, nevada, 2024 avg..

Indicates a polling average for this poll type

Candidate is an incumbent

Partisan types

Democratic-funded

Republican-funded

Other party-funded

Campaign poll

The position of the flag indicates whether the organization is partisan. Organizations are considered partisan if they operate on behalf of a candidate, party, campaign committee, PAC, super PAC, hybrid PAC , 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5) or 501(c)(6) organization that conducts a large majority of its political activity on behalf of one political party.

No matching polls

Read about how we use polls

Download the data.

When the dates of tracking polls from the same pollster overlap, only the most recent version is shown.

Data for FiveThirtyEight's previous favorability, presidential approval and national 2024 Republican primary averages is available for download here .

Notice any bugs or missing polls? Send us an email .

Design and development by Ryan Best , Aaron Bycoffe , Holly Fuong , Christopher Groskopf , Ritchie King , Ella Koeze , Dhrumil Mehta , Jasmine Mithani , Mary Radcliffe , Anna Wiederkehr and Julia Wolfe . Polling averages by G. Elliott Morris . Cooper Burton , Holly Fuong , Andrea Jones-Rooy , Irena Li , Dhrumil Mehta , Mary Radcliffe , Nathaniel Rakich , Derek Shan , Geoffrey Skelley and Julia Wolfe contributed research. Editing by Sarah Frostenson , Nathaniel Rakich , Kaleigh Rogers and Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux . Copy editing by Cooper Burton , Holly Fuong , Alex Kimball , Jennifer Mason , Andrew Mangan , Maya Sweedler and Curtis Yee .

Related Stories

Comments .

FAQs about YouGov's 2024 general election MRP model

Is this your prediction for the election?

No – this is not a prediction. It is our estimate of what the range of possible results would be if the election took place today and the voting intention was showing what it currently shows, based on our current data. It is not a prediction of where we will be on 4th July. We don’t know how things will change between now and polling day, but it would be surprising if things didn’t alter – one way or the other – before then.

Is this a poll?

No – it is a Multi-level Regression and Post-stratification (MRP) model that uses polling data. Polls aim to ask a representative sample of people a question and then show the results to that question, broken down by demographics. Our model uses a large sample of data collected from our panel to discover relationships between people’s characteristics and their answers to the voting intention question. It then combines these relationships/patterns with information about the characteristics of people living in different constituencies to construct estimates of how vote intention would look in each constituency, if we were able to do very large polls in every constituency. The sample sizes involved mean we speak to many different voters from many different places and across all constituencies in Great Britain.

What is the model and how does it work?

MRP (multi-level modelling and post-stratification) constituency projection models first estimate the relationship between a wide variety of characteristics about prospective voters and their opinions – in this case, which party they will vote for at the general election – in a ‘multilevel model’. It then uses data at the constituency level to predict the outcomes of seats based on the concentration of various different types of voters who live there, according to what the multilevel model says about their probability of voting for various parties (‘post-stratification’). The precise multilevel model equation has been benchmarked to correctly estimate the 2019 General Election to within a couple of seats of each party’s actual performance in that election, and the overall approach to MRP by YouGov has been used to successfully predict elections as recently as Spain in July 2023.

Have you assessed every local variable?

No, but we have used a very wide variety of variables that might capture different voting patterns. These include socio-demographic characteristics of individuals and the constituencies they live in, past vote choices of individuals and shares for various parties within each constituency, and information about the candidates standing for different parties. While we cannot reliably capture every factor specific to every single seats, but our large model sample sizes will help us get close to understanding how voters are behaving in different places up and down the country.

Who made the model?

The model has been designed and tested by members of the YouGov political team, headed by Dr Patrick English. The same team has recently successfully designed MPR model projections for the Spanish 2023 general election, the 2024 Catalonian parliament election, and battleground races across England in the 2023 and 2024 local authority elections. YouGov MRP models are written and fit with the open-source software Stan. Stan was developed at Columbia University by Andrew Gelman and his colleagues, with support from YouGov and other organisations.

Are you saying these numbers are exactly right?

Both the seat and voting intention estimates have uncertainty, as does any measurement using survey data. For each party in each seat, as well as the seat total for each party overall, we report ‘credible intervals’ which represent the range of data we believe the ‘true’ shares (and seat totals) have a 90% chance of lying within, The specific number presented for each party is the most likely value, which is typically very close to the middle of that range. So when assessing the data it is best to remember that both the seat and voting estimates for all parties projected could very well be higher, or lower, than this midpoint.

How have you accounted for turnout?

We estimate voter turnout probability from a range of sources, including voter demographics, previous patterns of turnout among different voter groups (from the British Election Study), and self-reported likelihood to turn out at this coming election

How many people have you polled in my constituency?

It varies from seat-to-seat, but a minimum of 35 in each constituency. Naturally, we cannot ask everyone in a constituency how they would vote, and a model cannot produce as accurate a result as a full-scale poll in each seat. However, the sample size in each constituency is not all that important given that the demographics of each constituency – based on census data – are what is actually used to map voter data into each constituency.

Why are you doing this?

Elections are becoming more difficult to assess and so, as well as running traditional polls, we are looking at new ways to meet the challenge. We know we run a risk publishing so much data in the heat of a campaign but as data scientists we are committed to innovating, to increase both accuracy and specificity. We hope that voters, campaigners, and the media are able to form an accurate picture of the current state of the election as a result and make the decisions that each of those groups make in a campaign based on more accurate information, rather than less accurate, information.

Why should I trust you over other research companies?

There are other seat-level estimates being published and reported on during this campaign. YouGov has the strongest track record of applying these methods successfully in US, Spanish, Australian, and UK elections. Nonetheless, we recognise that these methods are relatively new, and that each election can present new challenges. Methods which have worked well in the past may no longer do so. We are committed to constantly improving our methods and we make every effort to ensure that our work represents our best estimation of what the world thinks.

What impact will new boundaries have?

The 2024 election will be the first since the 2023 parliamentary boundary review, in which wholesale changes were made to the constituency map up and down the country. Only around 80 constituencies are left unchanged since 2019. This creates a modelling challenge for MRP, which relies on constituency-based information to work. Most importantly - party shares in each constituency at the previous election. While notional results have been produced by experts such as Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher, no official data exists for how each party would have performed in 2019 if the constituencies used then were the same ones we will be using now. This is an important source of potential error for the model as it tries to accurately and best-reflect the shape of British electoral geography in 2024.

We acknowledge and appreciate the use of data sourced from Democracy Club, available at Democracy Club . Specifically, our polling data by candidate name in our General Elections page  is sourced from the platform provided at "Who Can I Vote For?."

Explore more data & articles

Voting Intention

UK General Election 2024

How is Britain voting as the 2024 general election campaign begins?

How have Britons reacted to the general election?

General election 2024: what are the most important issues for voters?

Do you think turnout for local and general elections would be higher or lower if they were held on the weekend (as opposed to on a Thursday), or would it make no difference?

Rishi sunak has called the general election to be held on 4 july. do you think he was right or wrong to call the general election at this time, would you support or oppose it being made compulsory for all young people to either serve in the military for a year or spend one weekend every month for a year community volunteering, who do people think will win the next election, voting intention, likelihood to vote liberal democrat in the next general election.

• Advertising with TBJ
• e-Newsletter
• Submit News/People on the Move
• KMJ Biz Report
• Create an account

Company that bred beagles for research pleads guilty to neglect, ordered to pay record $35M fine

A company that bred beagles for medical research agreed Monday to pay a record $35 million as part of a criminal plea admitting it neglected thousands of dogs at its breeding facility in rural Virginia.

Prosecutors said the penalties amount to the largest ever levied in an animal-welfare case.

The plea deal also bars the company that operated the facility, Envigo RMS, as well as parent company Inotiv, from breeding or selling dogs in the future.

The federal investigation of Envigo drew national attention in May 2022 when federal authorities conducted a search of the breeding facility in Cumberland County, Virginia, and found nearly 450 animals in acute distress.

The company later agreed to relinquish all 4,000 beagles at the facility, which were sent around the country for adoption.

U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia Christopher Kavanaugh, whose office prosecuted the case, said Monday after a plea hearing at federal court in Charlottesville that Envigo and Inotiv “prioritized profits and convenience over following the law.”

He said the company generated $16 million in revenue between 2019 and May 2022, when the search occurred, through the sale of 15,000 beagles over that time.

But he said the company refused to make the investments necessary to provide for the animals’ basic care. Cages were cleaned twice a month rather than every day as required. Animals were euthanized, including by direct injections to their heart, without sedation, he said. Dogs were routinely injured by getting their paws caught in flooring composed of metal grates that left space for paws to easily fall through. Food and water were lacking and unclean

Court records show that 300 puppies died over a seven-month stretch around 2021 for what was described as “unknown causes.”

He said the company continued to employ a veterinarian who had botched surgeries and oversaw numerous violations because executives believed it would be too difficult to find a replacement.

Todd Kim, assistant attorney general for the environment and natural resources division of the Justice Department, said Envigo “unlawfully enriched itself by failing to spend the necessary money for upgrades and by failing to hire enough trained and competent staff.”

The Cumberland facility, which employed nearly 40 people, has been shuttered. Kavanaugh said it was woefully understaffed to care for thousands of dogs.

The plea deal calls for an $11 million fine for violating the Animal Welfare Act and an $11 million fine for violating the Clean Water Act. The deal also requires Inotiv to spend $7 million over the next three years to improve its facilities and meet standards in excess of the Animal Welfare Act requirements.

The plea deal includes an admission that Envigo violated the Clean Water Act by discharging hundreds of thousands of gallons of improperly treated wastewater.

It also includes a $3.5 million for environmental repairs in Cumberland County and requires the company to pay the cost of a compliance monitor while it’s on probation, which will run for a period of three to five years.

The plea agreement also requires the companies to pay roughly $1.9 million to the Humane Society of the United States for assistance it provided to the investigation.

Prosecutors also said their investigation is ongoing and that criminal cases against individual employees remain possible.

West Lafayette, Indiana-based Inotiv issued what it called a “statement of contrition” Monday after the plea hearing.

“In committing the crimes identified in the charging document, and by not making the necessary infrastructure upgrades and hiring the requisite staff, we fell short of our standards for animal and environmental welfare and apologize to the public for the harm caused by our conduct, the company said. “In resolving this matter, we renew our commitment to maintaining the highest standards of animal care.”

Related Posts

A company that bred beagles for medical research agreed Monday

(AP) — A U.S. federal court of appeals panel suspended

Shares of GameStop soared Monday following speculation that the man

Stocks ended mostly higher on Wall Street, closing out the

e-Newsletter Signup

Article views

To continue website access to

TheBusinessJournal.com

please create a FREE account OR login here.

SKIP THE POP-UPS For only $59 for one 1-year you will receive the Print edition along with EVERYTHING The Business Journal has to offer digitally, PLUS you will have unlimited 24- hour a day access to view articles at

Use Promo Code WEBSUB20

*New Subscribers Only

Already a member? CLICK HERE to login.

XX Days Remaining

until you can view 5 more free articles

Want access? Subscribe now & save $20 OFF.

Use Promo Code

* NEW SUBSCRIBERS ONLY

[ Placeholder content for popup link ] WordPress Download Manager - Best Download Management Plugin

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

How Public Polling Has Changed in the 21st Century

61% of national pollsters in the u.s. used methods in 2022 that differed from those of 2016, table of contents.

• Changes to polling after 2020 differed from those after 2016
• Pollsters increasingly use multiple methods – sometimes three or more
• Text messaging and address-recruited panels see growth after 2020
• Acknowledgments
• Inclusion criteria
• Who is a ‘pollster’ in this study
• Which polling organizations were included
• Data collection
• Assumptions made when information was incomplete
• Strengths and weaknesses of the research design
• Supplemental materials

This study looks at how national public opinion polling in the United States changed from 2000 to 2022. It focuses on two aspects: the sample source(s) – that is, where the survey takers came from – and the mode(s) , or how they were interviewed. The study tracks both the growth in the number of national pollsters and changes to how they conduct their public polls.

The unit of analysis is the polling organization. The dataset accompanying this report lists the 78 organizations included. The Documentation URLs file provides the webpages used to code the methods. The Codebook details what each code means. Center researchers compiled the poll information in several stages and using a variety of sources. The initial coding of sample source and mode of interview was based on information available from sources such as pollster websites, news articles, press releases and the Roper iPoll data archive. After compiling the data, Center staff attempted to contact each organization and ask them to confirm whether the information for that organization was accurate. Most organizations that responded confirmed that the information gathered was accurate. When organizations provided corrections or additions, staff updated the study database with that information. Each of these steps is described in greater detail in the Methodology .

Address-based sampling (ABS). ABS refers to recruiting survey takers by selecting a random sample of residential addresses from a master list, such as that maintained by the U.S. Postal Service.

Interactive voice response (IVR). IVR refers to a poll that entails automatic dialing of telephone numbers and a recorded voice asking a series of survey questions. They are sometimes referred to as “robo-polls.”

Mode of interview. This refers to the format in which respondents are presented with and respond to survey questions. Surveys can be administered by an interviewer, or they can be self-administered. The most common interviewer-administered mode in public polling is live telephone. The most common self-administered modes include online, text message and paper.

Method. This study uses the term “method” broadly, referring to the source of the respondents (the “sampling frame”) and how they were interviewed (the “mode”). This study describes a change in either of those as a change in method.

Multiple methods. Sometimes pollsters use multiple sample sources or multiple interview modes within a poll. Other times pollsters use multiple sample sources or multiple interview modes within the same year but in separate polls. The study describes any of the above as a pollster using multiple methods that year.

Survey panel. This is a group of people who have agreed to take surveys on an ongoing basis. The survey panels documented in this study each have thousands (and in some cases tens of thousands) of members.

Probability-based panel. This refers to a national survey panel recruited using random sampling from a database that includes most people in the population. Today, most such panels in the U.S. recruit by drawing random samples of residential addresses or telephone numbers. Typically, data collection with these panels is done online. However, some of these panels interview a small fraction of respondents (usually about 5% or fewer) using an offline mode such as live telephone. These panels are “probability-based” because the chance that each address or phone number was selected is known. However, the chance that each selected person will join the panel or take surveys after joining is not known.

Online opt-in polls. These polls are recruited using a variety of methods that are sometimes referred to as “convenience sampling.” Respondents are not selected randomly from the population but are recruited from a variety of online sources such as ads on social media or search engines, websites offering rewards in exchange for survey participation, or self-enrollment in an opt-in panel. Some opt-in samples are sourced from a panel (or multiple panels), while others rely on intercept techniques where respondents are invited to take a one-off survey.

Registration-based sampling. Some election polls sample from an official list of registered voters. All states are required to maintain a computerized and up-to-date list of voters and to make these lists publicly available for non-commercial purposes such as voter outreach and research. 

Sampling frame. A sampling frame is a list of the population of interest. For a survey of the public, it is typically telephone numbers or residential addresses and ideally includes all members of the population (though in practice there are often gaps and omissions). The survey sample is selected from this list.   

Sponsor. In this report, a survey sponsor is an organization that publicly releases results from a poll conducted on its behalf. Survey sponsors typically conceive of the study and either provide or obtain funding for it. Sponsors and vendors sometimes share the practical tasks involved in conducting a survey, such as when a sponsor drafts the questionnaire, and the vendor creates the sample and collects the data. This report uses “sponsor” and “pollster” interchangeably.   

Text message polling. Text messaging is used by some organizations to contact a sample of cellphone numbers for the purpose of either directing respondents to an online survey or asking them a set of survey questions using a series of text messages and responses.          

Vendor. In this report, the survey vendor is the organization that collects the survey data. The full set of tasks necessary for a survey are often shared between the sponsor and vendor, with the exact mix being determined by the specific expertise of the two parties and other factors. Sometimes vendors are also sponsors, either alone or in partnership with other sponsors.  

The 2016 and 2020 presidential elections left many Americans wondering whether polling was broken and what, if anything, pollsters might do about it. A new Pew Research Center study finds that most national pollsters have changed their approach since 2016, and in some cases dramatically. Most (61%) of the pollsters who conducted and publicly released national surveys in both 2016 and 2022 used methods in 2022 that differed from what they used in 2016. The study also finds the use of multiple methods increasing. Last year 17% of national pollsters used at least three different methods to sample or interview people (sometimes in the same survey), up from 2% in 2016.

This study captures what changes were made and approximately when . While it does not capture why the changes were made, public commentary by pollsters suggests a mix of factors – with some adjusting their methods in response to the profession’s recent election-related errors and others reacting to separate industry trends . The cost and feasibility of various methods are likely to have influenced decisions.

This study represents a new effort to measure the nature and degree of change in how national public polls are conducted. Rather than leaning on anecdotal accounts, the study tracked the methods used by 78 organizations that sponsor national polls and publicly release the results. The organizations analyzed represent or collaborated with nearly all the country’s best-known national pollsters. In this study, “national poll” refers to a survey reporting on the views of U.S. adults, registered voters or likely voters. It is not restricted to election vote choice (or “horserace”) polling, as the public opinion field is much broader . The analysis stretches back to 2000, making it possible to distinguish between trends emerging before 2016 (e.g., migration to online methods) and those emerging more recently (e.g., reaching respondents by text message). Study details are provided in the Methodology . Other key findings from the study include:

Pollsters made more design changes after 2020 than 2016. In the wake of the 2016 presidential election , it was unclear if the polling errors were an anomaly or the start of a longer-lasting problem. 2020 provided an answer , as most polls understated GOP support a second time. The study found that after 2020, more than a third of pollsters (37%) changed how they sample people, how they interview them, or both. This compares with about a quarter (26%) who made changes after 2016. As noted above, though, these changes did not necessarily occur because of concerns about election-related errors.

The number of national pollsters relying exclusively on live phone is declining rapidly. Telephone polling with live interviewers dominated the industry in the early 2000s, even as pollsters scrambled to adapt to the rapid growth of cellphone-only households. Since 2012, however, its use has fallen amid declining response rates and increasing costs. Today live phone is not completely dead, but pollsters who use it tend to use other methods as well. Last year 10% of the pollsters examined in the study used live phone as their only method of national public polling, but 32% used live phone alone or in combination with other methods. In some cases, the other methods were used alongside live phone in a single poll, and in other cases the pollster did one poll using live phone and other polls with a different method.

Several key trends, such as growth of online polling, were well underway prior to 2016. While the 2016 and 2020 elections were consequential events for polling, the study illustrates how some of the methodological churn in recent years reflects longer-term trends. For example, the growth of online methods was well underway before 2016. Similarly, some live phone pollsters had already started to sample from registered voter files (instead of RDD, random-digit dialing) prior to 2016.

Use of probability-based panels has become more prevalent. A growing number of pollsters have turned to sampling from a list of residential addresses from the U.S. Postal Service database to draw a random sample of Americans, a method known as address-based sampling (ABS). There are two main types of surveys that do this: one-off or standalone polls and polls using survey panels recruited using ABS or telephone (known as probability-based panels). Both are experiencing growth. The number of national pollsters using probability-based panels alone or in combination with other methods tripled from 2016 to 2022 (from seven to 23). The number of national pollsters conducting one-off ABS surveys alone or in combination with other methods during that time rose as well (from one in 2016 to seven in 2022).

The growth of online opt-in among national pollsters appears to have paused after 2020. The number of national pollsters using convenience samples of people online (“opt-in sampling”) – whether alone or in combination with other methods – more than quadrupled between 2012 and 2020 (from 10 to 47). In 2022, however, this number held flat, suggesting that the era of explosive growth could be ending.

Whether changes to sample sources and modes translate into greater accuracy in presidential elections remains to be seen. The fact that pollsters are expanding into new and different methods is not a guarantee that the underrepresentation of GOP support occurring in 2016 and 2020 preelection polls has been fixed. Polling accuracy improved in 2022 , but this represents only one nonpresidential election. 

Notable study limitations

A study of this nature requires difficult decisions about what exactly will be measured and what will not. This study focuses on two key poll features: the sample source(s) – that is, where the respondents came from – and the mode(s) , or how they were interviewed. While important, these elements are not exhaustive of the decisions required in designing a poll. The study did not attempt to track other details, such as weighting, where public documentation is often missing. Because the study only measured two out of all possible poll features, estimates from this study likely represent a lower bound of the total amount of change in the polling industry.

Another limitation worth highlighting is the fact that state-level polls are not included. Unfortunately, attempting to find, document and code polling from all 50 states and the District of Columbia would have exceeded the time and staff resources available. A related consideration is that disclosure of methods information tends to be spottier for pollsters who exclusively work at the state level, though there are some exceptions. It is not clear whether analysis at the level of detail presented in this report would be possible for state-only pollsters.

While not necessarily a limitation, the decision to use the polling organization rather than individual polls as the unit of analysis has implications for the findings. The proliferation of organizations using online methods implies but does not prove that online polls grew as well. However, research conducted by the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) following the 2016 and 2020 elections reveals an explosion in the share of all polling done using online methods . AAPOR estimated that 56% of national polls conducted shortly before the 2016 election used online methods; the comparable share for 2020 was 84%. More details on the strengths and weaknesses of the study are presented in the Methodology .

Changes in methods are driven by many considerations, including costs and quality

In an attempt to verify the accuracy of the categorization of polling methodologies, researchers attempted to contact all organizations represented in the database. Several pollsters contacted for this study noted that use of a particular method was not necessarily an endorsement of methodological quality or superiority. Instead, design decisions often reflect a multitude of factors. Survey cost – especially the increasing cost of live phone polling – came up repeatedly. Timing can also be a factor, as a design like address-based sampling can take weeks or even months to field. As noted above, this study does not attempt to address why each organization polled the way they did. It aims only to describe major changes observable within the polling industry. Nor does it evaluate the quality of different methods, as a multitude of other studies address that question.

The study found a different kind of change within the polling industry after 2020 versus 2016. After 2020, changes were both more common and more complex. More than a third (37%) of pollsters releasing national public polls in both 2020 and 2022 changed their methods during that interval. By contrast, the share changing their methods between 2016 and 2018 was 26%.

The nature of the changes also differed. About half of the changes observed from 2016 to 2018 reflected pollsters going online – either by adding online interviewing as one of their methods or fully replacing live phone interviewing. By contrast, the changes observed from 2020 to 2022 were more of a mix. During that period, some added an approach like text messaging (e.g., Change Research , Data for Progress ), probability-based panels ( Politico , USA Today ) or multiple new methods ( CNN , Wall Street Journal ). About a quarter of the change observed from 2020 to 2022 reflected pollsters who had already moved online dropping live phone as one of their tools (e.g., CBS News , Pew Research Center ).

A look at change over the entire recent period – from 2016 to 2022 – finds that more than half of national public pollsters (61%) used methods in 2022 that differed from those they used in 2016. As noted above, if features like weighting protocols were included in the analysis, that rate would be even higher.

A longer view of modern public polling (going back to 2000) shows that methodological churn began in earnest around 2012 to 2014. That was a period when about a third of national pollsters changed their methods. Change during that period was marked by pollsters starting to migrate away from live telephone surveys and toward online surveys.

Pollsters are not just using different methods, many are now using multiple methods, the study found. Here again there is a discernable difference in how polls changed after 2016 and how they changed after 2020. After 2016, the share of pollsters using multiple methods remained virtually unchanged (30% in both 2016 and 2018). After 2020, however, the share climbed to 39%. Notably, the share of pollsters using three or more different methodologies in their national public polls tripled from 5% in 2020 to 17% in 2022.

In this analysis, “multiple methods” refers to use of multiple sample sources (e.g., registered voter files and random-digit dial) or multiple interview modes (e.g., online, mail, live telephone). In some cases, several methods were used in a single poll. In other cases the pollster did one poll using one method and another poll using another method.

As an example, in 2014 Pew Research Center switched from exclusively using live phone with random-digit-dial sample to also using a probability-based panel . In 2020 the Center added an additional method, one-off address-based sample surveys offering online or mail response. By 2022, the Center dropped live phone polling. Pollsters that used at least three different methods in 2022 include CNN, Gallup, NPR, Politico and USA Today.

An overarching theme in the study is the growth of new methods. Analysis earlier in this report aimed to describe trends for the most prominent methods. In the past, pollsters often used just one method (e.g., live phone with random-digit dial). That has changed. Today pollsters tend to use new methods (such as text) as one of several ways that they reach people. To track the trajectory of these newer methods, it helps to consider the number of pollsters using the method by itself or in combination with other methods.

A prime example is text message polling. An extremely small share of pollsters conduct national public polls exclusively by text. A larger share use text alongside another method, such as online opt-in.

How texting is used varies. In some cases respondents receive a text with a web link for an online survey. In other cases, respondents answer the questions via text. Among the pollsters in this study, just one used texting in a national public survey in 2020. In 2022 that number rose to nine, representing 13% of the active national pollsters tracked that year. These figures reflect the number of pollsters using texting alone or in combination with other methods like live phone.

Analysis looking at methods used either alone or in combination with other approaches also suggests a change in the trajectory of online opt-in polling. While online opt-in usage grew tremendously between 2006 and 2020, that growth appears to have slowed if not stopped in 2022 for national polling.

By contrast, the share of national pollsters turning to probability-based panels continues to grow. In 2022 a third (33%) of national pollsters used probability-based panels either alone or in combination with other methods. This is up from roughly 10% during most of the 2010s.

Live phone was once the dominant method of polling but has been in decline since 2016. As of 2022, about a third of national pollsters used live phone alone or in combination (32%), while a much smaller share relied on it as their only method (10%).

The study also tracked the adoption of a specific kind of opt-in sample – members of an online opt-in panel who are matched to a record in a national registered voter file. This study first observed that approach in 2018. In 2018, 2020 and 2022, about 3% to 5% of national public pollsters used online opt-in samples matched to registered voter files, the study found.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Online Surveys
• Survey Methods
• Telephone Surveys

What 2020’s Election Poll Errors Tell Us About the Accuracy of Issue Polling

A field guide to polling: election 2020 edition, methods 101: how is polling done around the world, methods 101: mode effects, methods 101: survey question wording, most popular, report materials.

• Codebook (PDF)
• Dataset (XLS)
• Documentation URLs (XLS)

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

Advertisement

Prigozhin’s public support remains significant despite Russian propaganda efforts, polls show.

Experts are divided over the accuracy of polling in Russia, but polling firms say well-designed surveys can still produce reliable results.

• Share full article

By Anatoly Kurmanaev

• July 3, 2023

Yevgeny V. Prigozhin’s failed rebellion sharply dented his domestic support, but nearly 30 percent of Russians continue to view the Wagner mercenary leader positively, according to opinion polls whose results were released Monday.

Results from two surveys conducted in June by Russian Field, a nonpartisan Moscow-based research company, found that Mr. Prigozhin’s decision to march his Wagner mercenaries on Moscow on June 24 reversed a steady rise in opinion polls that had made him one of Russia’s most popular wartime leaders.

Mr. Prigozhin’s short lived-rebellion, which he called off within hours, had posed the most dramatic challenge to President Vladimir V. Putin’s leadership in his two decades in power.

Mr. Prigozhin’s residual support is particularly striking in light of a concerted effort by the Russian government to discredit him; the lack of public support for the mutiny from Russian political and military leaders; and the deaths of several Russian military pilots who confronted Wagner’s rebels. The polls also took place amid an increasingly draconian crackdown on free speech, which has seen Russians jailed for expressing anti-government views.

Experts are divided over the accuracy of polling in Russia, where criticizing the war in Ukraine is illegal. Some claim that repression prevents respondents from expressing their real views. Polling firms defend their work by saying that well-designed surveys can still produce reliable results.

Between 70 and 80 percent of people reached by telephone by Russian Fields refused to participate, highlighting the difficulties of capturing public opinion in the country.

Russian Field surveyed two separate groups of about 1,600 people across Russia by phone, one shortly before and the other shortly after Wagner’s mutiny. The polls had a margin of error of 2.5 percent.

Overall, Mr. Prigozhin’s support fell by 26 percentage points following the mutiny, according to the poll. Twenty-nine percent of those surveyed said they still viewed Mr. Prigozhin in a positive light, while nearly 40 percent said they viewed the mercenary leader negatively. One-third of respondents said they were not familiar with his activities or declined to answer.

The findings appeared to align with an analysis conducted in June by FilterLabs.AI, a public opinion firm that monitors social media and internet forums to track popular sentiment in Russia. That analysis found a sharp reduction in Mr. Prigozhin’s support after the rebellion.

As Mr. Prigozhin lodged increasingly caustic attacks against the Russian ruling class, his support steadily rose until he staged his high-stakes gambit against the government, the polls by Russian Field found. The share of Russians who supported him rose by 14 percentage points, to 55 percent, from February to early June, according to the research company, despite a lack of media coverage from state-dominated television networks, which continue to be an influential source of news for Russians.

“Prigozhin’s rating was based on two pillars: the support of Vladimir Putin and honest rhetoric. He called things by their name and talked about problems that others were afraid to speak of,” Artemiy Vvedenskiy, the founder of Russian Field, said in written responses to questions.

The polls show that state propaganda has been partly successful in changing these perceptions. Following the rebellion, Mr. Prigozhin’s support fell most sharply among Russians over 60 and those who primarily obtain information from television, according to the polls.

By contrast, Russians between 18 and 44 years old were nearly evenly split among supporters and opponents of Mr. Prigozhin, the polls found. The mercenary leader and tycoon also maintained strong support among Russians who obtain their information primarily from the popular messaging app Telegram and internet news sites, suggesting that his online media network has considerable reach.

Mr. Prigozhin arrived last week in Belarus, according to that country’s pro-Russian president, Aleksandr G. Lukashenko, although he has not been seen publicly since the rebellion. The Russian authorities have blocked news and other websites controlled by the Wagner leader.

His future popularity will depend on how active he remains publicly, given that few “straight shooters” remain in Russia’s tightly controlled media space, Mr. Vvedenskiy said.

Julian Barnes contributed reporting.

Anatoly Kurmanaev is a foreign correspondent covering Russia’s transformation after its invasion of Ukraine. More about Anatoly Kurmanaev

Our Coverage of the War in Ukraine

News and Analysis

The decision by the Biden administration to allow Ukraine to strike inside Russia  with American-made weapons fulfills a long-held wish by officials in Kyiv  that they claimed was essential to level the playing field.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken suggested that Ukraine’s use of U.S.-supplied arms could expand beyond the current limitation  to strikes in the Kharkiv area.

Top Ukrainian military officials have warned that Russia is building up troops near northeastern Ukraine , raising fears that a new offensive push could be imminent.

Zelensky Interview: In an interview with The New York Times, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine challenged the West  over its reluctance to take bolder action.

Fleeing a War Zone: A 98-year-old Ukrainian grandmother stumbled past corpses and bomb craters  to escape Russia’s attacks.

Russia’s RT Network : RT, which the U.S. State Department describes as a key player in the Kremlin’s propaganda apparatus, has been blocked in Europe since the war started. Its content is still spreading .

How We Verify Our Reporting

Our team of visual journalists analyzes satellite images, photographs , videos and radio transmissions  to independently confirm troop movements and other details.

We monitor and authenticate reports on social media, corroborating these with eyewitness accounts and interviews. Read more about our reporting efforts .

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Research: Why Companies Should Disclose Their Lack of Progress on DEI

• Evan Apfelbaum

Stakeholders value transparency and accountability — even when you’re falling short.

Many companies have set goals to increase employee diversity, and many companies have fallen short of meeting their goals. Most leaders would likely prefer to keep this lack of progress quiet, but research shows that there may be benefits to being transparent about it. Specifically, this type of disclosure can signal that you take diversity seriously and are genuinely committed to the goals you’ve set for your organization. That said, taking too long to make progress can dampen any goodwill you might receive from disclosure.

In the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder and the national reckoning around racial injustice in 2020, many companies redoubled their commitment to increase the diversity of their workforce. New practices and policies were introduced to help reach diversity goals set by leadership, and for quite a few, this commitment was broadcast widely: centered in a CEO speech, a press release, a company town hall, on social media, or in internal messages to employees.

• Evan Apfelbaum is a social psychologist and associate professor at BU’s Questrom School of Business. His research leverages behavioral science to reveal the challenges and potential of diversity and social change.
• Eileen Suh is a postdoctoral scholar at the Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University. Her research focuses on understanding why organizations struggle to achieve diversity and inclusion goals and identifying effective strategies to improve these efforts.

Partner Center

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.