1 / 20

NONSAMPLING ERROR RESEARCH IN PRACTICE

This article reviews sources of nonsampling error and discusses examples of research conducted on nonsampling error in surveys, such as NHES and NALS. It also explores how we choose methodological studies and the different types of total survey error. Additionally, it examines coverage error, nonresponse error, and response error.

royce
Download Presentation

NONSAMPLING ERROR RESEARCH IN PRACTICE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NONSAMPLING ERROR RESEARCH IN PRACTICE J. Michael Brick and Graham Kalton Westat

  2. OUTLINE • Review sources of nonsampling error • Discuss examples of nonsampling error research: • NHES – YATS • NALS – RCGS • NIPRCS • Discuss how we choose which methodological studies to be conducted

  3. TOTAL SURVEY ERROR • Sampling error • Nonsampling error • Missing data • Coverage error • Nonresponse error • Measurement error • Response error • Processing (coding, data entry) error

  4. COVERAGE ERROR • Undercoverage to avoid missing persons within households • Undercoverage due to missing households • Studies of estimation methods to reduce bias • Studies of efficient designs with lower coverage rates • Studies of the level of coverage bias for specific topics.

  5. NATIONAL HOUSEHOLD EDUCATION SURVEY (NHES) • Repeating RDD survey on education topics. • Two topics of interest in 1989 were high school dropouts and preschool enrollment of 3 to 5 year olds. • Concerns about undercoverage lead to an evaluation using data from CPS supplement that covered these topics and could be classified by telephone status.

  6. NHES COVERAGE BIAS ESTIMATES Coverage rates-14-21 yr olds = 92%; 3-5 yr olds = 88%

  7. NONRESPONSE ERROR • Nonresponse bias studies to evaluate the level of nonresponse bias in estimates based on: • Frame data, • Nonresponse follow-ups, • Simulations. • Studies evaluating estimation methods (e.g., use of different auxiliary variables) to reduce bias. • Studies evaluating methods of increasing response rates.

  8. NHES:2003 INCENTIVE EXPERIMENT

  9. NATIONAL ADULT LITERACY SURVEY (NALS) 1992 • Adults interviewed and given literacy tests. Concern that nonresponse was related to literacy. • An incentive experiment offered $0, $20, and $35. • Response rates for $20 & $35 were about 9 pct. pts. higher than $0; for minorities 20 pts. higher. • Scores substantially higher for $0 vs. $20 & $35. • Data collection cost lowest for $20.

  10. RESPONSE ERROR • Studies evaluating the level of errors due to: • Recall • Questionnaire design • Sensitive items • Interviewers

  11. NATIONAL IMMUNIZATION PROVIDER RECORD CHECK STUDY • Parents reported children’s immunizations in a supplement to the NHIS. • Concerns about the accuracy of the parent reports (especially if reported by recall rather than from shot cards) lead to checks with medical providers. • Provider and parent reports reconciled to create “best” values which are treated as “true values”.

  12. GROSS AND NET DIFFERENCE RATES • Gross difference rate gdr = (B + C)/N • Net difference rate (bias) ndr = (B – C)/N

  13. NDR AND GDR FOR DTP, BY USE OF SHOT CARD, 1994-1996 • Parents substantially underreported DTP. • Greater underreporting when shot cards used. • Greater accuracy when shot cards used.

  14. NHES 1995 REINTERVIEW STUDY • The 1995 Adult Education Survey had a response variance reinterview (n = 1,109 out of 19,722) • 21% reported work-related (WR) activities; • gdr = 12.5% ndr = −5.7% • 22% reported personal development (PD); • gdr = 14.3% ndr = −1.2%

  15. NHES INTENSIVE BIAS STUDY • Used an intensive, cognitive-type reinterview to determine “true values” • Small sample (n = 206) chosen to explore reporting AE participation in WR and PD

  16. YOUTH ATTITUDE TRACKING STUDY • Annual cross-sectional RDD survey of 16-24 year olds conducted for the DoD to track attitudes towards military service. • Design shifted to include a panel component. • Annual enlistment propensities declined because panel members had lower propensities to enlist.

  17. YATS ADVISORY GROUP • Panel attrition and conditioning were the main sources considered. • Few variables consistently related to panel attrition and enlistment propensity. • Revised weighting adjustments did not narrow the gap between RDD and panel estimates. • DoD reverted to a fully cross-sectional design.

  18. THE 1991 RECENT COLLEGE GRADUATE SURVEY • The RCGS included: • A nonresponse study, • A reinterview study, • An interviewer variance study, • A record check study, and • Other evaluation studies • Made strong assumptions of additive errors to model mean square error of estimates. • Major contribution is understanding general magnitude of errors by source.

  19. FACTORS INFLUENCING RESEARCH CHOICES • Study the major error sources for the specific survey design • Include substantively important variables • Conduct studies with the potential for assessing current estimates and/or designing future surveys • Take advantage of opportunities for research • Small studies can be valuable • Inexpensive studies on low priority issues or using less rigorous methods can be worthwhile

  20. References • Brick, J.M., Burke, J., and West, W. (1992). Telephone undercoverage bias of 14- to 21-year-olds and 3- to 5-year-olds (Technical report No. 2, NCES 92-101). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. • Brick, J.M., Cahalan, M., Gray, L., and Severynse, J. (1994). A study of selected nonsampling errors in the 1991 Survey of Recent College Graduates. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, NCES 95-640. • Brick, J.M., Hagedorn, M.C., Montaquila, J., Roth, S.B., and Chapman, C. (2004). Using an experiment to design an RDD survey. Proceedings ofthe Survey Methods Section of the American Statistical Association [CD-ROM], 4923-4928. • Brick, J.M., Kalton, G., Nixon, M., Givens, J., and Ezzati-Rice, T. (2000). Statistical issues in a record check study of childhood immunization. Proceedings of the 1999 Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology Research Conference (Statistical policy working paper 30, 625-634). • Brick, J.M., and Morganstein, D. (1996). Estimating response bias in an adult education survey. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association, 728-733. • Brick, J.M., Wernimont, J., and Montes, M. (1996). The 1995 National Household Education Survey: Reinterview results for the adult education component (NCES 96-14). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. • Mohadjer, L., Berlin, M., Rieger, S., Waksberg, J., Rock, D., Yamamoto, K., Kirsch, I., Kolstad, A. (1997). The role of incentives in literacy survey research, Chapter 10 pp 209-244 in Adult Basic Skills: Innovations in Measurement and Policy Analysis, eds. Tuijnman, Kirsch, and Wagner, Hampton Press, 1997.

More Related