Research: how does it work? Based on the results of this ESPN poll, we can conclude that it’s an imprecise and sometimes misleading science.
— Stephanie Haberman (@StephLauren) January 9, 2014
According to this guy, the “survey” above was an experiment created by an ESPN-affiliated radio station in order to see whether it would be possible to reach a 100% consensus on any given survey question.
The answer, obviously, was no.
This all came about as a sort of semi-protest of the fact that Greg Maddux, former pitcher for the Chicago Cubs and the Atlanta Braves who is unquestionably one of baseball’s greatest, was not a unanimous selection for the MLB Hall of Fame. One sports writer declined to endorse him simply because he played during the game’s “steroid era” in the late 90′s/early 00′s. Boo, hiss, etc.
Of course, as communications professionals we already know that any study will have its outliers. This little stunt just proves that the act of drawing large conclusions from small samples is probably not the best idea.
Unless you believe that 15% of people don’t like money.
(H/T to Darshan Patel for explaining this to us)