Consumer Reports: Most reliable cars and ratings.
- Thread starter saberz
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
..... Someone said that CR is biased. Facts, please. I've not seen any.
http://www.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=6104009
..... Someone said that CR is biased. Facts, please. I've not seen any.
http://www.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=6104009
Originally Posted By: PeteTheFarmer
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
JD surveys are sent out based on registration records.
OK, if that's supposed to be an advantage. However, we don't know if the owners kids are completing the surveys.
On general principle, I think I'd refuse to participate simply for having my personal info given by the manufacturer without my consent.
Nice bit of selective editing there....
Thats why owner surveys are biased, as I noted
And the registration records are not personal, the manufacturer doesnt give it out, your state does.
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
JD surveys are sent out based on registration records.
OK, if that's supposed to be an advantage. However, we don't know if the owners kids are completing the surveys.
On general principle, I think I'd refuse to participate simply for having my personal info given by the manufacturer without my consent.
Nice bit of selective editing there....
And the registration records are not personal, the manufacturer doesnt give it out, your state does.
Originally Posted By: Anies
I don't see how its completely biased. The surveys are from the people(YOU). That drive those vehicles and respond back with their qualms and what not.
Where did I say it was "completely" biased?
And please, tell me how does CR have any clue as to what the respondent actually owns and drives? They dont verify ownership at all that I can find in their statements.
I don't see how its completely biased. The surveys are from the people(YOU). That drive those vehicles and respond back with their qualms and what not.
Where did I say it was "completely" biased?
And please, tell me how does CR have any clue as to what the respondent actually owns and drives? They dont verify ownership at all that I can find in their statements.
]
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Nice bit of selective editing there....
Thats why owner surveys are biased, as I noted
And the registration records are not personal, the manufacturer doesnt give it out, your state does.
Well, if it's a concern with CR, it should be a concern with JD Powers too, correct?
Also, JD Powers searching public data to find out what I own hardly increases my willingness to participate.
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Nice bit of selective editing there....
And the registration records are not personal, the manufacturer doesnt give it out, your state does.
Well, if it's a concern with CR, it should be a concern with JD Powers too, correct?
Also, JD Powers searching public data to find out what I own hardly increases my willingness to participate.
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
At least JD Power verifies that the "owner" actually owns the car. JD surveys are sent out based on registration records.
But overall, I agree, ANY owner survey is prone to owner bias.
Correct Pete, try reading what I posted again...maybe it will sink in the second time. Do you see where I state any owners survey contains a bias?
At least JD Power verifies that the "owner" actually owns the car. JD surveys are sent out based on registration records.
But overall, I agree, ANY owner survey is prone to owner bias.
Correct Pete, try reading what I posted again...maybe it will sink in the second time. Do you see where I state any owners survey contains a bias?
Last edited:
What I read was your accusation about 'selective editing', so I simply thought I'd explain why included that phrase of yours about who completes the survey. We've each said that any user survey has problems
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
But there's a key distinction here: non-representative data doesn't imply that an organization is biased in either direction. Someone earlier made the direct accusation that CR, the organization, is biased.
I don't think they're biased. Performing sloppy research does not make someone biased. A bias would show up as alteration of the results of that research.
I have no doubt that they report results exactly as they get them. However: Garbage In, Garbage Out.
But there's a key distinction here: non-representative data doesn't imply that an organization is biased in either direction. Someone earlier made the direct accusation that CR, the organization, is biased.
I don't think they're biased. Performing sloppy research does not make someone biased. A bias would show up as alteration of the results of that research.
I have no doubt that they report results exactly as they get them. However: Garbage In, Garbage Out.
Originally Posted By: JOD
Many people are willing to pay for it. That's ultimately proof of its worth, at least in my book.
Many people are willing to pay for the "Weekly World News", too.
Many people are willing to pay for it. That's ultimately proof of its worth, at least in my book.
Many people are willing to pay for the "Weekly World News", too.
Originally Posted By: PeteTheFarmer
What I read was your accusation about 'selective editing', so I simply thought I'd explain why included that phrase of yours about who completes the survey. We've each said that any user survey has problems
So, in your estimation is a survey based on verified owners more or less reliable than a survey based on subscribers who may or may not actually own the car they are rating?
My point is and was, "at least" JD Power takes the step of verifying ownership...CR, not even close.
What I read was your accusation about 'selective editing', so I simply thought I'd explain why included that phrase of yours about who completes the survey. We've each said that any user survey has problems
So, in your estimation is a survey based on verified owners more or less reliable than a survey based on subscribers who may or may not actually own the car they are rating?
My point is and was, "at least" JD Power takes the step of verifying ownership...CR, not even close.
Originally Posted By: brianl703
.... Performing sloppy research does not make someone biased. A bias would show up as alteration of the results of that research.
Would changing the test criteria in order to reach a desired result count as bias?
Would intentionally misrepresenting that same test data to the world count as a bias?
Would subjecting a test vehicle to many, many more tests than other comparable vehicles count as a bias?
Look into the reporting CR did on the Suzuki Samurai and tell me that isn't bias. Testing in search of a presumed/known outcome is bias by definition.
.... Performing sloppy research does not make someone biased. A bias would show up as alteration of the results of that research.
Would changing the test criteria in order to reach a desired result count as bias?
Would intentionally misrepresenting that same test data to the world count as a bias?
Would subjecting a test vehicle to many, many more tests than other comparable vehicles count as a bias?
Look into the reporting CR did on the Suzuki Samurai and tell me that isn't bias. Testing in search of a presumed/known outcome is bias by definition.
All I'm sure about about CR is that their research is as unscientific as it gets.
As to whether they're biased, that's a whole separate issue.
As to whether they're biased, that's a whole separate issue.
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
My point is and was, "at least" JD Power takes the step of verifying ownership...CR, not even close.
I'm not convinced this makes a huge difference in the reliability of the survey.
My point is and was, "at least" JD Power takes the step of verifying ownership...CR, not even close.
I'm not convinced this makes a huge difference in the reliability of the survey.
Where did "huge difference" enter the equation?
It's a simple question, if owner surveys have ANY reliability at all. Would you say a verified owner respondent is more reliable than an unverified owner respondent?
It's a simple question, if owner surveys have ANY reliability at all. Would you say a verified owner respondent is more reliable than an unverified owner respondent?
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Where did "huge difference" enter the equation?
It's a simple question, if owner surveys have ANY reliability at all. Would you say a verified owner respondent is more reliable than an unverified owner respondent?
No, it's not a simple question. There are several factors which determine whether or not a survey is reliable, and you are trying to reduce it to ONE issue.
Huge Difference entered the equation when I provided it as an answer to your question
Where did "huge difference" enter the equation?
It's a simple question, if owner surveys have ANY reliability at all. Would you say a verified owner respondent is more reliable than an unverified owner respondent?
No, it's not a simple question. There are several factors which determine whether or not a survey is reliable, and you are trying to reduce it to ONE issue.
Huge Difference entered the equation when I provided it as an answer to your question
No, you are trying to expand it beyond the simple factor I'm asking about.
Of course there are many factors involved. But when considering the ownership issue. Would you say a verified owners responses are more or less reliable than an unverified owners responses?
Without trying to obfuscate and entertain a host of outside issues, just consider this one factor for the moment.
Of course there are many factors involved. But when considering the ownership issue. Would you say a verified owners responses are more or less reliable than an unverified owners responses?
Without trying to obfuscate and entertain a host of outside issues, just consider this one factor for the moment.
I've already given my answer to this one issue, that I don't think it makes a huge difference in the reliability of the survey, and you asked how this enters the equation. You want to focus on this one issue, and you're accusing me of obfusucating? This one issue is NOT the determining factor of whether or not these surveys have value, which is actual issue.
Never said any such thing, please point out where I did.
I'm merely trying to get an honest answer to ONE of the MANY factors involved. Apparently, in your mind one issue with owner surveys cant be discussed without dredging up all the issues that they have.
Nice dancing around the question with you....
I'm merely trying to get an honest answer to ONE of the MANY factors involved. Apparently, in your mind one issue with owner surveys cant be discussed without dredging up all the issues that they have.
Nice dancing around the question with you....
Your one question is an oversimplification. Let's say we know one respondent owns the car he is surveyed about, and the other one were not sure of. Note that he may or may not own it, we don't know for sure he doesn't
From this limited info, we're supposed to reach a conclusion about whether his responses are more reliable? Simply because we know he owns the car? Nothing about his veracity, only that a third party has verified ownership?
Perhaps this limited info is enough for you to conclude that his responses are more honest. Or perhaps you think this limited info is enough for someone to reach a conclusion about veracity. It's not enough for me.
From this limited info, we're supposed to reach a conclusion about whether his responses are more reliable? Simply because we know he owns the car? Nothing about his veracity, only that a third party has verified ownership?
Perhaps this limited info is enough for you to conclude that his responses are more honest. Or perhaps you think this limited info is enough for someone to reach a conclusion about veracity. It's not enough for me.
Do we have to go through this every year?
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
