I wouldn't be too suspicious of polling in Ukraine per se. Of course there are complexities with sampling a displaced population, and those living under occupation (and KIIS's director usually explains these complexities in his methodological notes, which are always worth a read), but polling in Ukraine is not fraught like it is in some places in the west with non-response bias or, in the case of election polling in the US, identifying the universe of likely voters.
It's more accurate to say polling doesn't give the full picture -- nor is it designed to, especially on complex, emotional topics facing a nation at war. This is where qualitative research (focus groups) is extremely revealing. What do Ukrainians mean when they say they are optimistic? What does victory mean? Why are some folks switching to Ukrainian and under what circumstances? Having watched dozens of focus groups in the last six months, I promise you that while the polls are interesting, the focus groups provide the kind of depth and nuance you find lacking, and frankly, will break your heart. I advise clients that they should believe the polls, but understand the limits of a four or five response closed scale in revealing everything about what's going on.
Thanks for the comment--you're absolutely right and I should have been more clear that my problem isn't with the institution of polling in Ukraine as a whole, but rather with some specific questions that tend to bring up specific answers that are then spread across media (the belief in victory one and the language one being the two major cases).
Your point about focus groups is a really important as well, I've had access to a few of them and they are almost always fascinating and chokefull of insights. But these also tend to be made for private customers and therefore not available to the wider public.
I wouldn't be too suspicious of polling in Ukraine per se. Of course there are complexities with sampling a displaced population, and those living under occupation (and KIIS's director usually explains these complexities in his methodological notes, which are always worth a read), but polling in Ukraine is not fraught like it is in some places in the west with non-response bias or, in the case of election polling in the US, identifying the universe of likely voters.
It's more accurate to say polling doesn't give the full picture -- nor is it designed to, especially on complex, emotional topics facing a nation at war. This is where qualitative research (focus groups) is extremely revealing. What do Ukrainians mean when they say they are optimistic? What does victory mean? Why are some folks switching to Ukrainian and under what circumstances? Having watched dozens of focus groups in the last six months, I promise you that while the polls are interesting, the focus groups provide the kind of depth and nuance you find lacking, and frankly, will break your heart. I advise clients that they should believe the polls, but understand the limits of a four or five response closed scale in revealing everything about what's going on.
Thanks for the comment--you're absolutely right and I should have been more clear that my problem isn't with the institution of polling in Ukraine as a whole, but rather with some specific questions that tend to bring up specific answers that are then spread across media (the belief in victory one and the language one being the two major cases).
Your point about focus groups is a really important as well, I've had access to a few of them and they are almost always fascinating and chokefull of insights. But these also tend to be made for private customers and therefore not available to the wider public.
All true!