Stouffer Claims Poll Inadequate in Scope

Samuel A. Stouffer, professor of Sociology, last night gave unqualified approval to the results of the CRIMSON's poll of the University. He said that the poll was generally fair and clearly indicative of sentiment in some respects, but he criticized several aspects of the poll for falling short of accuracy.

In particular, Professor Stouffer said that the CRIMSON should have polled the Medical School and that the sampling at the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences was far too small. He said:

"To many people, one of the most interesting findings of the CRIMSON poll will be the fact that Ike carries the freshmen while Adlai carries the upper-classmen in the College. Precisely the same thing happened in 1952. Does this reflect the influence of pro-Stevenson sentiment in the Harvard Faculty? If no, what?

"The CRIMSON has, I know, he continued, "tried hard to conduct a fair poll. It tried to build in good safeguards, for example, against duplicate voting. I do feel, however, that its over-all figure purporting to represent the University as a whole may properly be questioned. For example, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences is very much under-represented. If the non-voters in the GSAS had been in the same proportion as those who voted, the total Stevenson vote for Harvard would be much higher.

"On the other hand," Stouffer said, "the Medical School is not represented at all, and if the medical students tend to be Republican, one bias might offset the other."

Stouffer added that "another curiosity is the Radcliffe vote. Are the women here less pro-Ike than the Harvard men? If so, this is an exception to what national polls show about sex differences in attitudes in this campaign.