This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2015/may/27/power-of-yes-why-wording-of-britains-eu-referendum-matters

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The power of Yes: why the wording of Britain’s EU referendum matters The power of yes: why the wording of Britain’s EU referendum matters
(about 3 hours later)
Along with when it will take place and who will be permitted to vote, one of the factors most likely to influence the outcome of the EU membership referendum confirmed in the Queen’s Speech on Wednesday is: what question will it ask? Along with when it will take place and who will be permitted to vote, one of the factors most likely to influence the outcome of the EU membership referendum confirmed in the Queen’s Speech on Wednesday is: what question will it ask?
Getting the question right in a referendum is important not just because, as any politician involved in last year’s vote on Scottish independence will confirm, it is far easier to campaign for a Yes than for a No. It also matters because how a question is worded can sometimes affect the response to it. When the SNP was asked to propose its preferred question for the independence referendum, for example, it came up with: “Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?” Getting the question right in a referendum is important not just because, as any politician involved in last year’s vote on Scottish independence will confirm, it is far easier to campaign for a yes than for a no. It also matters because how a question is worded can sometimes affect the response to it. When the SNP was asked to propose its preferred question for the independence referendum, for example, it came up with: “Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?”
The Electoral Commission, which says questions must be clear, simple and neutral, and should avoid misleading voters or encouraging them to consider one response more favourably than another, stripped out the “Do you agree …”, leaving just: “Should Scotland be an independent country?” The original question implied that the person posing it is pro-independence, and expects the answer Yes. This plays unfairly to what is known in the jargon as “acquiescence bias”: the tendency of most respondents not to want to challenge an assumption implicit in the question. The Electoral Commission, which says questions must be clear, simple and neutral, and should avoid misleading voters or encouraging them to consider one response more favourably than another, stripped out the “Do you agree …”, leaving just: “Should Scotland be an independent country?” The original question implied that the person posing it is pro-independence, and expects the answer yes. This plays unfairly to what is known in the jargon as “acquiescence bias”: the tendency of most respondents not to want to challenge an assumption implicit in the question.
Psychologists also believe that the implication of a downside (or possible loss) can produce a stronger negative reaction than the positive response usually triggered by mention of an upside (or eventual gain) – which is partly why “Should Britain leave the European Union?” and “Should Britain stay …” are each, to some extent, biased no matter where you stand on the issue.Psychologists also believe that the implication of a downside (or possible loss) can produce a stronger negative reaction than the positive response usually triggered by mention of an upside (or eventual gain) – which is partly why “Should Britain leave the European Union?” and “Should Britain stay …” are each, to some extent, biased no matter where you stand on the issue.
Most experts agree that referendum questions must be easy to understand, unambiguous and to the point. Asking, as the Scottish devolution question did in 1979, “Do you want the provisions of the Scotland Act 1978 to be put into effect?” was maybe not ideal. Nor was the legalistic, jargon-filled 54-word question that the citizens of Quebec were asked to vote on in the second of their independence referendums in 1995. (Like the previous plebiscite in 1980, that one failed, despite including the word “agree” in its proposition.) And the question put to Californians in 2008 on proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage, confused even some politicians: voting No meant saying Yes to same-sex unions, while voting Yes meant they would be disallowed. Most experts agree that referendum questions must be easy to understand, unambiguous and to the point. Asking, as the Scottish devolution question did in 1979, “Do you want the provisions of the Scotland Act 1978 to be put into effect?” was maybe not ideal. Nor was the legalistic, jargon-filled 54-word question that the citizens of Quebec were asked to vote on in the second of their independence referendums in 1995. (Like the previous plebiscite in 1980, that one failed, despite including the word “agree” in its proposition.) And the question put to Californians in 2008 on proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage, confused even some politicians: voting No meant saying yes to same-sex unions, while voting yes meant they would be disallowed.
For Britain’s in-out EU referendum, due before the end of 2017, the Electoral Commission has already given a hint of the kind of question it would like to see. A private member’s bill introduced last year by the Eurosceptic MP James Wharton included the question: “Do you think the UK should be a member of the European Union?” For Britain’s in/out EU referendum, due before the end of 2017, the Electoral Commission has already given a hint of the kind of question it would like to see. A private member’s bill introduced last year by the Eurosceptic MP James Wharton included the question: “Do you think the UK should be a member of the European Union?”
The electoral watchdog tested this, found some people didn’t know Britain was already in the EU, and reckoned it might confuse them. It suggested: “Should the UK remain a member of the European Union?”, which was “clear and straightforward”, but still contained “a degree of perceived bias” because it would allow the “in” camp to campaign for a Yes. The electoral watchdog tested this, found some people didn’t know Britain was already in the EU, and reckoned it might confuse them. It suggested: “Should the UK remain a member of the European Union?”, which was “clear and straightforward”, but still contained “a degree of perceived bias” because it would allow the “in” camp to campaign for a yes.
The alternative, “most neutral wording” was: “Should the UK remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?” (with “Remain” and “Leave” as the two options on the ballot paper). According to a BBC report on Wednesday, the government favours the first option – an indication, perhaps, of its preferred outcome.The alternative, “most neutral wording” was: “Should the UK remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?” (with “Remain” and “Leave” as the two options on the ballot paper). According to a BBC report on Wednesday, the government favours the first option – an indication, perhaps, of its preferred outcome.