By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
QuintonMcLeod on 03 May 2014
Edit Thread
crissindahouse said:
QuintonMcLeod said:


Ermm... I never mentioned Sony. The point had nothing to do with Sony at all - or even Nintendo.

Also, it's difficult to get "fired" in Japan. Additionally, the culture in Japan is very different. In Japan, most people do their work and not complain. So, whether the work is good or bad, this isn't something openly discussed in Japanese culture. So, what makes this particular survey bias is that even if there _were_ issues with the companies the Japanese worked for, they would mostly never talk about them.

The survey is mostly about company perception, and the unemployed are much louder than the employed. In Japanese culture, where you work is what you do. Your attitude there can either help or hurt the company as a whole. So, most Japanese are loyal to where they work for this very reason. However, most of the unemployed have no loyalty to any particular company; so their opinions would be more vocal and more honest. However, their voices were completely cut from the frame. Therefore, you'll never truly know how Japan as a whole thinks.

Another thing I must mention. Ignore the unemployment rate when it comes to surveys. I made a great example before, and I'll break it down again. In the US, African Americans take up 15-20 percent of the entire population. So out of 1000 people, you may conclude that African Americans take up 150 to 200 people out of 1000 people. Meanwhile, white Americans would encompass 800 - 850 of the rest of that 1000. That's an overwhelming majority, right? So, what you're thinking is that, if we don't survey African Americans, then the survey would stay the same. However, that is completely false. Like I said earlier: The location in which the survey in conducted is important. Notice how the Japanese survey didn't specify where in Japan this survey was conducted. I'll break it down further. If we were to go to the poor areas of Chicago and conduct a survey, chances are, African Americans and other minorities would take up the bulk of that survey - despite the fact that they are the minority. 

Surveys can be skewed in a way that would make something totally false appear to be true. Excluding an entire group of people, not providing additional details such as income level, location and etc., makes this survey rubbish (and yes I did check the pdf). Excluding the unemployed is like excluding African Americans because they're the minority, and therefore, need not be included. I'm making that example to prove that, just because something is of a low percentage, doesn't mean the survey will give you the same results if it were excluded.

No, I did the math for this case so don't compare it with 15-20% African Americans or whatever. It was particular about this survey and the 4% unemployement rate since you were the guy who said that "many" companies wouldn't be in that list and this is simply wrong. Most would probably not even change their position.  Not sure if you even read what I wrote. I even said that you are right that this survey isn't 100% accurate because of that but you can still expect almost the same result if you would switch 40 of the 1000 people.  I used Sony as example because this thread was about them and Nintendo and Sony got a high 40% or around 400 votes so that they could expect to lose more votes as most others in this ranking if Sony would get less votes from unemployed people. But even they would lose only 16 votes if we would take the average loss they could expect and if not only one unemployed would vote for them. 

All I tried to explain to you was that you are wrong when you say that many companies wouldn't be in that list if 4% of the voters would have been unempoyed. Even the companies at the end of the list wouldn't have problems to stay in the list. If only every fifth vote was a "Yes" for a company  then this company will only lose around 8 "Yes" votes if you have to replace 40 of the 1000 voters because only 8 of 40 or 200 of 1000 voted with "Yes". And this only if not only one unemployed will vote for this company. 

And it is very unrealistic that companies who aren't in that list would get more votes from unemployed since there is no reason for employed to vote less for a company unemployed would like to vote for. 

You're very hung up on the math here. Get math out of your mind....

If you survey 999 African Americans out of 1000 Americans, your results will differ than surveying 999 white Americans out of 1000 Americans - this is despite one group of people being a minority. This isn't rocket science. This is just plain common sense.

 

The survey doesn't represent Japan as a whole. It only represents 1000 people somewhere in Japan. Opinions differ from region to region. Even if unemployment is 4%, that is still over 5 million people. 1000 out of 5 million unemployed people will still give a different result than 1000 out of 5 million employed people.

 

In regards to your point. Yes, many companies wouldn't be there if the unemployed were counted. Stop using the survey's numbers, because the numbers are already bad.