We should all be deeply ashamed by this

I am deeply suspicious of phrases like ^politically representative people^exactly does it mean.

I have a professional background in surveys and sampling and recognise all the wheasle words and all the biases hidden in so many samples. I would also like to see the questionnaire. Frequently how you word your questions and your order of questioning can lead people to give you the answers you want them to give.

Me neither, MissA

suziewoozie so you believe that 4,103 represent all the voting public?

We are all fascists because we question the views of a tiny minority?
What a daft post

Call all research uses a sample of the population - whether it’s for drug development or attitudes.

Could you please post a link then, suziewoozie so that we can all read through them?

Conspiracy? I was posting about a survey, not a conspiracy.

I know Leave voters, none of them would condone violence ever.

Why do people think this is just about Leave voters?

It's Remain voters as well.

Questionnaire is available online MOnica. All research has flaws,every single piece but it doesn’t make it rubbish. I think the points you make are of a different order to some of the others being made on here such as sample size.

I know, suziewoozie, as I don't live in a bubble!

However, I would question just how representative this cross-section of the voting public this actually is.

Yes, I know that "It’s academic research carried out by a team headed by two reputable academics based at Cardiff and Edinburgh. It’s the latest findings from a project called the Future of England which has been going for several years." but googling those details has not found me anything from that organisation about people saying that violence against MPs is Ok if it brings about Brexit.

As you have found it, it would be helpful if you told the rest of us. I would have posted a link if I had found it.

How do you think drug trials are carried out?

Callistemon, having expressed deep suspicions about this sample, I am now going to say that you can have a sample of 4103 that is representative of the total population.

The ability to do this depends on how your sampling frame is set up. Somewhere I still have the set of statistical tables that shows me the probability that a random sample of a given size taken from a large population will be a cross section of said population. It is disconcerting how small a sample can be, to give you a 95% certainity that your sample is representative of the whole population.

However the secret is exactly who makes up the population you are drawing your sample from and, as I have said, the phrase politically representative people is a very imprecise term and could hide a multitude of biasses and exclusions.

I know full well how drugs trials are carried out.

Do you think we are all simple suzie?

it was very very easy to find the link. If you’re capable of passing judgement on the research, then you should be capable of finding it.

Well then if you know all about drug trials you’ll know the results are based on using relatively small samples

I now realise that Susiewoozie thought that I was implying a conspiracy to keep it from the public. No such thing had occurred to me, I was just surprised that I couldn't find something that had triggered several newspapers to publish articles on it. I decided that they had had an preview of it and it would be available to us all soon.

I realise that, M0nica but what may seem to be a representative sample could prove otherwise and some questions in such surveys and polls can be misleading or be set in a way which produces the required answers.

Oh, I see. You couldn't find it either and are referring only to previous reports from the Future of England project.

The usual aim of drugs trials is to find out, or prove, if a drug is safe.
Unfortunately, this may not always be the case despite previous and what is deemed to be rigorous research.

Well, I am seeing my MP this weekend so must suppress my urge to give him a smack.

Suziewoozie, yes, no research is without some flaws. Whether it makes the research results worthless, all depends on what the flaws are.

I am not saying this research is worthless. Merely that the description of the sample is imprecise. I am not looking for the questionnaire because what we are commenting on is a newspaper article reporting research results and I would expect a newspaper, especially The Guardian - and on such an inflammatory subject to make sure it has carefully checked the research out and can recognise what needs to be checked when dealing with such a contentious subject.

I would like to know the demographic of the sample surveyed as I find the results questionable.

The survey results are available by clicking the links at the bottom of the article

www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view/1709008-future-of-england-survey-reveals-public-attitudes-towards-brexit-and-the-union

Research conducted by Richard Wyn Jones who may not be unbiased himself.

Thank you Misadventure That link was not in the Gurdian article.

Yes it is Elegran. Just click on the link "an academic survey".

The 2019 Future of England Survey is conducted by YouGov.

The data:
www.cardiff.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/1708631/Copy-of-England-16-Oct-AH.pdf