Vri interviewing: The Vanguard Research Initiative: VRI Surveys

Опубликовано: January 2, 2023 в 1:04 pm

Автор: alexxlab

Категории: Miscellaneous

The Vanguard Research Initiative: VRI Surveys

The Vanguard Research Initiative (VRI) is a collaboration of the Vanguard Group, the University of Michigan,
and New York University. VRI surveys are administered via the internet to a panel of Vanguard clients
to gather complementary information to Vanguard’s administrative data.
The panel was chosen by inviting Vanguard account holders fulfilling the following criteria:

Over 55 years old
Have a domestic address
No immediate record of a Vanguard annuity purchase
Hold between $10,000 and $5 million in assets with Vanguard
Have a valid email registered with Vanguard
Have logged on in the past six months

The sample was stratified such that each age group above 55 will be adequately represented,
as well as singles. The sample is also divided between individual accounts and
employer-sponsored accounts.

The initial cohort of 9,000 respondents joined the VRI in 2013 with Survey 1. A new cohort of 3,700 respondents joined the VRI in 2016 with Survey 5. The original cohort was also given Survey 5.

For information about each survey, including questionnaires and live demonstration links,
please click below:

Survey	Field period begins (Pilot/Production)	Theme	Main Content
Survey 1	June 2013 August 2013	Wealth and portfolios	Demographics and employment Income, social security, pensions, and disability benefits; Housing assets Financial assets: investment, savings, and retirement accounts
Survey 2	October 2013 January 2014	Annuity and long-term care	Demographics and pensions updates Bequest plans Long-term care insurance Expectations on longevity, long-term care, annuity purchases Hypothetical annuity products SSQs: risk aversion, bequest motives, long-term care, and public-care aversion
Survey 3	May 2014 August 2014	Family, bequests, and transfers	Demographics updates Family inventory Major past expenses and future expense expectations (self and spouse, descendants and comparable other, and predecessors) Charitable giving expectations SSQs: risk aversion revisited (loss aversion version), bequest revisited, inter-vivos transfers
Survey 4	August 2015 October 2015	Work and transition to retirement	Work history: Career and bridge jobs Job separation Job search Conditional retirement expectations SSQs: Job flexibility; preferred jobs and search for opportunities; reservation wages
Survey 5	August 2016 (pilot and production merged, new cohort)	Wealth and Portfolios	Demographics and employment Income, social security, pensions, and disability benefits; Housing assets Financial assets: investment, savings, and retirement accounts
Survey 6	January 2018 March 2018	Work and transition to retirement	Work history: Career and bridge jobs Job separation Job search Conditional retirement expectations SSQs: preferences for working fewer hours and retirement decisions
Survey 7	December 2019 July 2020	Cognitive decline, agency, and financial decisionmaking	Demographics updates Subjective expectations about cognitive decline Quality of agents Optimal timing of transferring the control to the agent; likelihood and cost of missing the optimal timing Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on financial and long-term care planning

How To Avoid Falling For A Fake Poll

Fake polls. Amateur-ish polls. They’re becoming a problem, and they’re likely to become a bigger one. But you don’t need to be a statistician to spot a suspicious poll. I’d recommend a few simple questions that everyone, professionals and amateurs, can ask of any poll to help avoid the suspect ones. And almost everyone, including me, has been fooled. (Almost the entire political media, for instance, was reporting on polls from Research 2000 before it was unveiled as a forgery.) There are going to be legitimate pollsters that don’t meet all of these criteria. But if you come across a “pollster” that fails most of these tests, I’d take your mouse off the retweet button and go on with your day.

First and foremost, does it seem professional? That may seem too basic, but it works surprisingly well. Is a pollster’s press release riddled with typos? Reputable pollsters are run by publicly identified people, and if they’re putting their professional reputations on the line, they probably want to make a good first impression. Spelling simple words wrong or misspelling the candidates’ names is often a sign that either a pollster doesn’t know what it’s doing or isn’t on the level. Small mistakes usually come with big mistakes.
Who? Who conducted the poll? Does the pollster have a long track record? Check out the polling firm’s website — are there real people with expertise listed there? Does the pollster even have a website and not just a Twitter account? (Websites are pretty easy to create, but some fake pollsters don’t even do that.) If a pollster doesn’t reveal the people working for the company, then you probably don’t want to cite the firm’s numbers.
How? How was the survey conducted (e.g., via automated phone, live telephone interview or on the internet)? If it was on the internet, see how the pollster was getting people to participate in its polls (e.g., via its own panel or Google Surveys). If it was on the phone, find out which phone bank was doing the calling. If a pollster isn’t revealing its methodology, don’t trust it. Legitimate, professional pollsters prize transparency.
What? What questions are being asked? If it’s a poll about an election, legitimate pollsters will typically ask respondents more than simply who they prefer, Candidate A versus Candidate B. The pollsters will want to find out why people are voting the way that they are (what issues matter to them, for example, or how favorably respondents view the candidates). At a minimum, pollsters will ask demographic questions in order to weight their data properly. If a pollster isn’t revealing this data and how it’s being weighted, be suspicious.
When? This works two ways. First, when was the poll itself conducted? And how many people did it reach? Those are crucial, standard details every on-the-level pollster releases. Second, when was the polling company founded? If there’s no answer, be suspicious. If it was only very recently, treat its results with caution until it has a body of work to judge.
Why? Polls cost money, so most pollsters aren’t conducting them on a whim. Academic institutions often poll to increase their name recognition, or to provide students an educational opportunity. Most professional pollsters conduct surveys to make money. If there isn’t something on the website that tells you why the pollster is conducting the poll, something is probably up.
Where? Find out where the company is located. Even in the age of the internet, most pollsters have a physical location. An address that you should be able to send a piece of mail to. An actual place that you can check exists via a website like the Whitepages.
Can you reach the pollster? Some fly-by-night operations won’t even have phone numbers on their websites for you to call. That’s probably not a good sign. If there is a phone number, see if it’s toll-free (

costs more money to the company, but less to the consumer). If it’s not a toll-free number, see if the area code matches the area where the company is located. And if you’re really adventurous, pick up a phone and see if you can speak to a real person. (You can also try the “Shattered Glass” trick, if you’re suspicious.) If there’s no number, shoot the pollster an email (assuming its website includes an address). Do you get a response?
Short on time? Check to see if polling websites like HuffPost Pollster or FiveThirtyEight have cited the pollster. If they haven’t, there’s probably a good reason.
Still unsure? If you think there’s a fake poll out there, simply email FiveThirtyEight at [email protected]. We’ll look into it.

Read more: Fake Polls Are A Real Problem

Harry Enten was a senior political writer and analyst for FiveThirtyEight. @forecasterenten

Comments

Manchester United’s reaction to Ronaldo’s scandalous interview

14 November 2022 • 09:47

Manchester United players and mentor Erik ten Hag learned about the high-profile interview with striker Cristiano Ronaldo just before flying to London for the 2-1 match against Fulham. This information was shared by journalist Kave Solhekol through social networks.

The source notes that the club is extremely dissatisfied with the words of the star Portuguese. The bosses of the Red Devils intend to consider all options for the future of the 37-year-old player. Manchester United believes that KriRo showed disrespect not only to the coaching staff, but also to the club itself, as well as to teammates.

It is quite likely that the Manchester United will get rid of the Portuguese in the January transfer window.

Ronaldo has only scored one goal in ten Premier League games this season.

Rate this news

Bookmaker bonuses

$100

Get

$100

Get