KMI-Masthead new

Can We Rely upon Poll Results?

emu medium

Poll Questions

Here is a recent question on the Quinnipiac University 2016 Presdidential Swing State Poll:

Would you say xxxxxxxxx is honest and trustworthy or not?

The structure of a question is very important. What does the phrase “honest and trustworthy”  mean? Is there a difference between the words “honest” and “trustworthy?” The words are similar but different. Otherwise there would be no need for two words.

Can someone be honest and not trustworthy? Can you imagine anyone who is honest but not trustworthy? How about someone who is not honest but is trustworthy? 

If you have a close friend who is embezzling money from his/her company, can that friend still be trustworthy? How about a friend who is honest, but with whom you hesitate to share secrets? If you can think of examples, how would you answer the question, “Is xxxxxxxxx honest and trustworthy, or not?

Here are the dictionary definitions:

“Honest” means

  • free of deceit and untruthfulness; sincere: I haven't been totally honest with you.
  •  morally correct or virtuous: I did the only right and honest thing.
  •  [ attrib. ] fairly earned, especially through hard work: struggling to make an honest living.
  •  (of an action) blameless or well intentioned even if unsuccessful or misguided: he'd made an honest mistake.
  • [ attrib. ] simple, unpretentious, and unsophisticated: good honest food with no gimmicks

“Trustworthy” means

  • able to be relied on as honest or truthful: leave a spare key with a trustworthy neighbor.

So, we need to be very careful when we listen to or interpret polls. The wording of the questions can mean different things to different people. Thus, the results are suspicious.

I would much rather see this poll break down the questions to read:

Would you say  xxxxxxxxx is honest?

Would you say xxxxxxxxx is trustworthy?

Would you say xxxxxxxxx is not honest?

Would you say xxxxxxxxx is not trustworthy?

The question, "Would you say xxxxxxxxx is honest and trustworthy or not?" is a sloppily worded question. The results cannot be relied upon. In order to get the truth, structure your questions so they are simple, precise, and clearly understood. Anything short of that and you risk getting imprecise results.

Get Mr. Koenig's book Getting the Truth

How to Ask the Right Question the Right Way


Excerpt from Chapter 10 of Getting the Truth

How to Ask the Right Question the Right Way

I asked the pastor, "May I smoke while I pray?"  Absolutely not.

I then asked, "May I pray while I smoke?" Absolutely.

The question structure determines the response.

Structure your initial questions to promote open, uncontaminated responses. Use only mutually understood words. Then look for precision, accuracy, simplicity, and directness. You then focus on where those are missing.

Here are some first questions/requests that may be properly constructed to help minimize contamination and produce uncontaminated responses:

• Tell me why you are here.

• Why am I here?

• What happened?

• What brought you here?

• Tell me about yourself.

All of these questions/requests are open ended. They allow the subject great latitude in determining where they start.

Think about it. Where do you start? Where you start determines where you finish. Where the subject starts her response is very important. It gives you insight into how they think and how they express themselves. It can tell you if they are linear, chronological thinkers or something else. It gives you a glimpse into what you can expect and to compare later responses. In short, these early explanations, discussions, will form the foundation to analyze and interpret the subject’s overall response. 

Get Getting the Truth



In a 2005 deposition, Attorney Delores Troiani (who represented a woman accusing Bill Cosby of sexual assault) asked Bill Cosby:

"When you got the Quaaludes, was it in your mind that you were going to use these Quaaludes for young women that you wanted to have sex with?" asks the plaintiff’s attorney, who is questioning Cosby.

Cosby answers simply, "Yes."

I recommend questions to be short, simple, compact and precise - more along the lines, “What was the purpose for the Quaaludes?” or, “For what were the Quaaludes?” This question violates that. Nevertheless it’s a very, very effective question. With Cosby’s simple and precise answer, “Yes,” the attorney proved what is extremely difficult to prove – intent. Not just intent, but devious intent. Now, we still don’t have Mr. Cosby saying “I gave Quaaludes to unknowing young women to have sex with them.” We do, however, have the evidence, in his own words telling us his intended use of the Quaaludes.

This discovery of the truth must be wonderful news to all those victims who took the long step to accuse an icon of sexual assault. I look for more victims to surface now that the stigma of false accusation is lifted. Cosby’s cover-up strategy didn’t work.

Get Mr. Koenig's book, "Getting the Truth."


".. unlocking the secrets of communication." - buy Mr. Koenig's autographed books at BOOKSTORE.

© 2010 – 2023 KMI Investigations, LLC.

infragard fbi footer logosExperts20Court20LogoBookSetRetired 2023 Digital BadgeACFEMCPI thumb logo 1024