|
|
|
|
|
|
by AndrewKemendo
4715 days ago
|
|
|
I wonder if there is room in the market to disrupt polling then. I have never been part of a poll but have heard similar bad things about their structure, so I wonder if anyone is out there trying to make it more accurate. |
|
|
1. A sane test design. Before trying to pull an MVP here, please take some psychology classes on that topic since there's already a huge body of work on how to design a test in a way that lets you infer reliable data, even if participants think the test is nuts (and try to sabotage it), or if they try to second-guess "desired" answers ("Of course I'm not racist").
2. Comparable data sets over time/regions. People are interested in how things change. That's the incumbent advantage in this market, they have all that stuff.
#2 also helps to get _some_ useful information out of insane questions (since they're consistently insane over the years).