probability RDD
Vanderbilt Poll
Vanderbilt Poll Tennessee, Spring 2021 · May 3–20, 2021 · US: Tennessee
Methodology
- Pollster
- Vanderbilt Poll academic
- Sponsor
- Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions (CSDI), Vanderbilt University
- Fielded
- May 3–20, 2021
- Population
- registered voters
- Sample size
- 1,000
- Sample frame
- probability RDD
- Mode
- telephone - CATI, live interviewer, landline and cell phone, fielded by SSRS
- Margin of error
- +/- 3.7 percentage points
- Weighting
- two-stage weighting: base weight for differential selection probabilities across sample strata, then post-stratification raking to Tennessee registered-voter parameters for sex, age, race, education and region; missing raking values hot-deck imputed
- Geography
- US: Tennessee
- Base notes
- Several items were asked of a random half sample; the half-sample n is recorded on each question's results rows.
Sources
Verification note. Wording and the full response distribution read from Vanderbilt's own Spring 2021 topline PDF; header gives n=1,000 Tennessee registered voters, +/-3.7 points, fielded May 3-20, 2021. Asked of the full sample in this wave.
Figures below are transcribed from these documents. Where they disagree with the source, the source governs.
Questions asked (1)
requiring middle- and high-school students to play on the team matching their sex at birth
Do you (support) or (oppose) requiring students to play on the team that matches their gender at the time of birth if they want to play in middle and high school sports? [OPTIONS IN PARENTHESES WERE ROTATED] [THEN PROBE: Do you (support/oppose) strongly or somewhat?]
Strongly support
60%
Strongly oppose
15%
Somewhat support
12%
Somewhat oppose
9%
(VOL.) DK
3%
(VOL.) REF
1%
Wording notes: does not use the word 'transgender'; the target group is identified only as students whose current team would not match 'their gender at the time of birth' | 'gender at the time of birth' rather than 'sex assigned at birth'
tilts_restrictive — The restrictive option is stated as a positive requirement ('requiring students to play on the team that matches their gender at the time of birth') while the affirming position is left implicit in 'oppose'; no transgender student is named, so the respondent is not told who the requirement excludes.