nonprobability quota
Military Times / Syracuse University Institute
Military Times/IVMF survey of active-duty troops · Dec 16–21, 2016 · US national - active-duty U.S. military
Data flag. MOE IS THE SOURCE'S OWN. Military Times states the margin was 'roughly 2 percent' for 1,664 responses; the simple-random floor is 2.40. The record faithfully reports the source. Note this was a voluntary opt-in online survey of subscribers, so a formal margin of error is questionable in principle, not just in arithmetic.
Methodology
- Pollster
- Military Times / Syracuse University Institute media
- Sponsor
- Military Times and IVMF
- Fielded
- Dec 16–21, 2016
- Population
- active-duty U.S. military service members
- Sample size
- 1,664
- Sample frame
- nonprobability quota
- Mode
- voluntary confidential online survey of Military Times subscribers and readers
- Margin of error
- approximately ±2 percentage points
- Weighting
- IVMF analysts estimated weights for each individual observation using a standard methodology
- Geography
- US national - active-duty U.S. military
- Base notes
- 87% male, 13% female; mean age 30; 73% white, 12% Hispanic, 11% African American, 4% Asian, 9% other
Sources
Verification note. percentages, sample size, field dates and demographic composition read from the Military Times write-up. This is a self-selected reader survey, not a probability sample of the force - Military Times' own stated margin of error should be treated as nominal. Republished on 2017-07-27 as context for Trump's ban announcement, but fielded in December 2016.
Figures below are transcribed from these documents. Where they disagree with the source, the source governs.
Questions asked (3)
active-duty opinion of the 2016 decision to allow open transgender service
What is your opinion of the decision to allow transgender troops to serve openly in the military?
Wording reconstructed from: paraphrase from the Military Times write-up; the IVMF instrument was not retrieved
Wording notes: asked of a self-selected military-readership sample, which skews older, more senior and more male than the force
unclear — wording not verified; the sample is nonprobability and the result diverges sharply from probability surveys of military households
perceived effect of open transgender service on unit readiness
What effect will allowing transgender troops to serve openly have on your unit's readiness?
Wording reconstructed from: paraphrase from the Military Times write-up
Little or no effect on readiness
47%
Hurt readiness
41%
Benefit readiness
12%
Wording notes: readiness framing, the same frame used in the Pentagon's own 2017-2019 policy justifications
unclear — wording not verified
perceived effect on morale
What effect will allowing transgender troops to serve openly have on morale?
Wording reconstructed from: paraphrase from the Military Times write-up
No effect on morale
27%
Boost morale
16%
unclear — wording not verified