Restricting the Spec 3c clean comparator to media-only polls (dropping pollster-self) gives β = +8.15 pp (p = 0.036, n = 165 rows / 28 race-week cells) — if anything larger than the media-or-pollster-self spec. Pollster-self inclusion is not pulling the headline up.

Confidence
green
Type
robustness
Design
Sample
estimulado-non-aggregate-match2
Specification
error ~ sponsored_by | candidate FE + race × week FE; sample restricted to self-sponsored OR media-only polls (sponsor_types == 'media'); within-(race × week) filter applied
Comparator
media_only
Time window
race_week
Cluster
muni
Script
source/analysis/regressions.py
Target
build/table/regressions.csv
Status
interpreted · 2026-06-14
Created
2026-06-14

Question

AN-002's Spec 3c uses a "clean comparator" pool of media + pollster-self polls. Pollster-self polls are polls a pollster fields without a paying sponsor — typically for stable-of-clients reputational reasons. The natural worry is whether including pollster-self polls is doing load-bearing work for the headline: a pollster fielding for itself might still have indirect motivations that correlate with sponsor incentives. GPT-5-pro's pre-submission review (2026-06-14) flagged this and asked for a side-by-side spec restricting the comparator to media-only.

Design

Same as AN-002 Spec 3c, but the comparator pool is restricted to polls whose sponsor_types == "media" (excluding pollster-self). After the within-(race × week) cell filter, the sample drops from 60 cells (288 rows in the standard Spec 3c) to 28 cells (165 rows).

Property Spec 3c (AN-002) Spec 3c media-only (this AN)
Comparator pool media + pollster-self media only
Cells (race × week) 60 28
Rows 288 165

Results

Spec β (sponsored_by) SE p
Spec 3c (AN-002, media + pollster-self) +8.05 2.60 0.003
Spec 3c media-only (this AN) +8.15 3.74 0.036

The media-only β is essentially unchanged from the standard 3c. The cell loss (60 → 28) widens the SE but the coefficient remains significant at the 5% level. If anything, dropping pollster-self pushes β up by 0.1 pp, so the standard 3c isn't averaging in a zero-effect pollster-self group.

Interpretation

The Spec 3c headline is not driven by including pollster-self in the comparator pool. The conservative spec (media-only) gives the same qualitative conclusion at less precision but a slightly higher point estimate. Justifies the standard 3c choice of media + pollster-self on power grounds without inflation risk.

Follow-ups