DOCSLIB.ORG

R(Y NONRESPONSE in SURVEY RESEARCH Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Household Survey Nonresponse 24-26 September 1997

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
R(Y NONRESPONSE in SURVEY RESEARCH Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Household Survey Nonresponse 24-26 September 1997 ZUMA Zentrum für Umfragen, Melhoden und Analysen No. 4 r(y NONRESPONSE IN SURVEY RESEARCH Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Household Survey Nonresponse 24-26 September 1997 Edited by Achim Koch and Rolf Porst Copyright O 1998 by ZUMA, Mannheini, Gerinany All rights reserved. No part of tliis book rnay be reproduced or utilized in any form or by aiiy means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any inforniation Storage and retrieval System, without permission in writing froni the publisher. Editors: Achim Koch and Rolf Porst Publisher: Zentrum für Umfragen, Methoden und Analysen (ZUMA) ZUMA is a member of the Gesellschaft Sozialwissenschaftlicher Infrastruktureinrichtungen e.V. (GESIS) ZUMA Board Chair: Prof. Dr. Max Kaase Dii-ector: Prof. Dr. Peter Ph. Mohlcr P.O. Box 12 21 55 D - 68072.-Mannheim Germany Phone: +49-62 1- 1246-0 Fax: +49-62 1- 1246- 100 Internet: http://www.social-science-gesis.de/ Printed by Druck & Kopie hanel, Mannheim ISBN 3-924220-15-8 Contents Preface and Acknowledgements Current Issues in Household Survey Nonresponse at Statistics Canada Larry Swin und David Dolson Assessment of Efforts to Reduce Nonresponse Bias: 1996 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) Preston. Jay Waite, Vicki J. Huggi~isund Stephen 1'. Mnck Tlie Impact of Nonresponse on the Unemployment Rate in the Current Population Survey (CPS) Ciyde Tucker arzd Brian A. Harris-Kojetin An Evaluation of Unit Nonresponse Bias in the Italian Households Budget Survey Claudio Ceccarelli, Giuliana Coccia and Fahio Crescetzzi Nonresponse in the 1996 Income Survey (Supplement to the Microcensus) Eva Huvasi anci Acfhnz Marron The Stability ol' Nonresponse Rates According to Socio-Dernographic Categories Metku Znletel anci Vasju Vehovar Understanding Household Survey Nonresponse Through Geo-demographic Coding Schemes Jolin King Response Distributions when TDE is lntroduced Hikan L. Lindström A Survey on Telephone Coverage in Finland Vesa Kuusela 1s it True that Nonresponse Rates in a Panel Survey Increase when Supplement Surveys are Annexed? Malka Kantorowitz How Many Mailings are Enough? Vasja Velzovar ccnd Katja Llzar Improving Advance Letters for Major Government Surveys Antanda White, Jean Mczrtin, Nikki Bennert und Srephunie Freeth FightingNonresponse in Telephone Interviews; Successful Interviewer Tactics Joop Hox, Edith de Leeirw utid Ger Snijkers The EfCcct of Interviewer Pcrsuasiori Strategies on Refusal Rates in Household Surveys Plztrick Sturgis und Puntekz Cuml~unelli lncentives in Two Germün Mai1 Surveys 1'396197 & 1997 Junet Hurkness. Peter Moltler, Michuel Scltneid arid Bertzluird Christol~lz Promised Inccntivcs on a Ründom Digit Dial Survey Ilailid Caritor; Britce Allen. Prltt-icia Curtnirlgharti, J. Micliael Brick. Rertee Slobusky, Pornelu Ciarrzbo clnd Jcfnny Kenny Does the Payment of lncentives Create Expectation Effects? Electnor Sittger, Jolin van Hoewyk nrld Mary P. Maher Interviewer Opinions, Attitudes and Strategies Regarding Survey Participation and Their Effect on Response Editlz de Leeuw~,Joop Ho-r, Ger Snijkers attd Wim de Heer The Effect of Interviewer and Respondent ~haracteristicson Refusals in a Panel Survey Gecrt Loosveldt, Ann Carton nnd Jnrt Picket? Longitudinal Nonresponse in tlie Currcnt Population Survey (CPS) 1Jrian A. Harris-Kojetin czrid Clyde Tucker A Bootstrap Strategy for the Detection of a Panel Attrition Bias in a Household Panel with an Application to the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP) 2 73 Ulrich Rendtel attd Felix Büchel Regression-Based Nearest Neighboiir Hot Decking Seppo Lmksorzen Handling of Household and ltem Nonresponse in Surueys Rajendrtl P. Singh und Rita J. Petroni Aspects Concerning Data Fusion Techniques Sltsanne Rnessler.nnd .Kar-lheinz Fleischer A Conditional Minimax Estimator for Treating Nonresponse Siclpfried Gabler aizd Snbine Häder Contributors in Alphabetical Order 350 Preface and Acknowledgements This volume, the fourth in the ZUMA-Nachrichten Spezial series on methodological issues in empirical social science research, takes up issues of nonresponse. Nonresponse, that is, the failure to obtain measurements from all targeted members 0f.a survey sample, is a problem which confronts many survey organizations in different parts of the world. The papers in this volume discuss nonresponse from different perspectives: they describe efforts undertaken for individual surveys and procedures employed in different countries to deal with nonresponse, analyses of the role of interviewers, the use of advance letters, incentives, etc. to reduce nonresponse rates, analyses of the correlates and consequences of nonresponse, and descriptions of post-survey statistical adjustments to compensate for nonresponse. All the contributions are based on presentations made at the '8th International Workshop on Household Survey Nonresponse'. The workshop took place from September 24 - 26, 1997 in Mannheim, Gerrnany, the home base of the workshop host institute, ZUMA. The international workshop series on nonresponse was initiated in 1990 by Robert Groves, University of Michigan, Bob Barnes, Office of National Statistics, UK and Lars Lyberg, Statistics Sweden. Since then, the workshop has been held ea~h"~earin a different country. The purpose of the workshop is to gather researchers and methodologists from statistical agencies, research institutes and universities interested and active in the nonresponse field, so that exchange of ideas and collaborations across nations and different type of organizations can take place in an informal setting. Former hosts have been Statistics Sweden, US Bureau of the Census, Statistics Netherlands, Office of National Statistics (UK), Statistics Canada, Statistics Finland and Istituto Nazionale di Statistica (Italy). The Mannheim workshop drew 51 delegates from nine European countries, as well as Canada, Israel and the United States. Twenty-nine papers were presented and discussed, of which twenty-five are included here. We would like to take this opportunity to thank all the participants of the workshop, in particular the presenters and the session chairpersons. We are especially grateful to Lilli Japec, Statistics Sweden, for her assistance in organizing the workshop. We also wish to thank Christa von Briel and Maria Kreppe-Aygün, ZUMA, for their support in planning the workshop as well as their patience in helping produce this volume. Mannheim, August 1998 Achim Koch, Rolf Porst Editors Current Issues in Household Suwey Nonresponse at Statistics Canada LARRYSWAIN AND DA VID DOLSON Abstract: A variety of current and recent initiatives and studies related to unit nonresponse for both cross-sectional und longitudinal household surveys at Statistics Canada is presented. Surveys discussed include the Labour Force Survey (LFS), supplementary und longitudinal surveys based on the LFS frame, the General Social Survey, und several household surveys carried out as special surveys. Factors injluencing response und initiatives tabn to maintain and maximize response are then reviewed. The next sections present adjustment techniques und a Summary of the major themes discussed in the paper. Keywords: response rates, maintaining und maximizing response, nonresponse adjustment 1 Introduction Despite the best efforts of survey managers and operations staff to maximize response, some degree of nonresponse is virtually certain to occur in household surveys. Nonresponse has two effects on survey data: one contributing to an increase in the sampling variance of estimates as the effective sample size is reduced from that originally sought; the other contributing to bias of estimates if nonrespondents differ from respondents in the characteristics measured. Survey budgets and potential nonresponse bias influence the decisions made about the degree of nonresponse that is tolerable and the depth of research into adjustments to survey data that compensate for nonresponse. Nonresponse is monitored for feedback to survey staff for immediate and future action and is reported to Users of the survey data as Part of the overall considerations of data quality. This paper is intended to take stock of recent and current events in household survey nonresponse at Statistics Canada in order to determine underlying themes.. It. is not- intended to.be -a complete overview of'all activities but is to be topical. The emphasis is on unit nonresponse, and not item nonresponse. This paper is an abbreviated version of that presented at the workshop and of the slightly modified version of the workshop paper noted below in the references. In the longer version, a more extensive overview of the various household surveys at Statistics Canada and their response rates is presented, along 2 ZUMA Nachrichten Spezial, August 1998 with an examination of monitoring and reporting of nonresponse, remarks on Statistics Canada's nonresponse databases and nonresponse standards, and an extensive list of references. 2 Maintaining and maximizing response 2.1 Factors influencing response Like many national statistical agencies, Statistics Canada conducts a wide variety of household surveys. Some are Part of the regular ongoing program while others conducted on an occasional or one-time basis are known as special surveys. The major example in the former group is the Canadian Labour Force Survey (LFS) which achieves response rates of about 95%. Supplemental surveys can be annexed to the LFS. Such surveys include the Family Expenditure Survey with response at about 70% to 80%
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lesson 3: Sampling Plan 1. Introduction to Quantitative Sampling Sampling: Definition
    Quantitative approaches Quantitative approaches Plan Lesson 3: Sampling 1. Introduction to quantitative sampling 2. Sampling error and sampling bias 3. Response rate 4. Types of "probability samples" 5. The size of the sample 6. Types of "non-probability samples" 1 2 Quantitative approaches Quantitative approaches 1. Introduction to quantitative sampling Sampling: Definition Sampling = choosing the unities (e.g. individuals, famililies, countries, texts, activities) to be investigated 3 4 Quantitative approaches Quantitative approaches Sampling: quantitative and qualitative Population and Sample "First, the term "sampling" is problematic for qualitative research, because it implies the purpose of "representing" the population sampled. Population Quantitative methods texts typically recognize only two main types of sampling: probability sampling (such as random sampling) and Sample convenience sampling." (...) any nonprobability sampling strategy is seen as "convenience sampling" and is strongly discouraged." IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Sampling This view ignores the fact that, in qualitative research, the typical way of IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIII selecting settings and individuals is neither probability sampling nor IIIII convenience sampling." IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII It falls into a third category, which I will call purposeful selection; other (= «!Miniature population!») terms are purposeful sampling and criterion-based selection." IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII This is a strategy in which particular settings, persons, or activieties are selected deliberately in order to provide information that can't be gotten as well from other choices." Maxwell , Joseph A. , Qualitative research design..., 2005 , 88 5 6 Quantitative approaches Quantitative approaches Population, Sample, Sampling frame Representative sample, probability sample Population = ensemble of unities from which the sample is Representative sample = Sample that reflects the population taken in a reliable way: the sample is a «!miniature population!» Sample = part of the population that is chosen for investigation.
    [Show full text]
  • 1988: Coverage Error in Establishment Surveys
    COVERAGE ERROR IN ESTABLISHMENT SURVEYS Carl A. Konschnik U.S. Bureau of the CensusI I. Definition of Coverage Error in the survey planning stage results in a sam- pled population which is too far removed from Coverage error which includes both under- the target population. Since estimates based coverage and overcoverage, is defined as "the on data drawn from the sampled population apply error in an estimate that results from (I) fail- properly only to the sampled population, inter- ure to include all units belonging to the est in the target population dictates that the defined population or failure to include speci- sampled population be as close as practicable fied units in the conduct of the survey to the target population. Nevertheless, in the (undercoverage), and (2) inclusion of some units following discussion of the sources, measure- erroneously either because of a defective frame ment, and control of coverage error, only or because of inclusion of unspecified units or deficiencies relative to the sampled population inclusion of specified units more than once in are included. Thus, when speaking of defective the actual survey (overcoverage)" (Office of frames, only those deficiencies are discussed Federal Statistical Policy and Standards, 1978). which arise when the population which is sampled Coverage errors are closely related to but differs from the population intended to be clearly distinct from content errors, which are sampled (the sampled population). defined as the "errors of observation or objec- tive measurement, of recording, of imputation, Coverage Error Source Categories or of other processing which results in associ- ating a wrong value of the characteristic with a We will now look briefly at the two cate- specified unit" (Office of Federal Statistical gories of coverage error--defective frames and Policy and Standards, 1978).
    [Show full text]
  • American Community Survey Design and Methodology (January 2014) Chapter 15: Improving Data Quality by Reducing Non-Sampling Erro
    American Community Survey Design and Methodology (January 2014) Chapter 15: Improving Data Quality by Reducing Non-Sampling Error Version 2.0 January 30, 2014 ACS Design and Methodology (January 2014) – Improving Data Quality Page ii [This page intentionally left blank] Version 2.0 January 30, 2014 ACS Design and Methodology (January 2014) – Improving Data Quality Page iii Table of Contents Chapter 15: Improving Data Quality by Reducing Non-Sampling Error ............................... 1 15.1 Overview .......................................................................................................................... 1 15.2 Coverage Error ................................................................................................................. 2 15.3 Nonresponse Error............................................................................................................ 3 15.4 Measurement Error ........................................................................................................... 6 15.5 Processing Error ............................................................................................................... 7 15.6 Census Bureau Statistical Quality Standards ................................................................... 8 15.7 References ........................................................................................................................ 9 Version 2.0 January 30, 2014 ACS Design and Methodology (January 2014) – Improving Data Quality Page iv [This page intentionally left
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3: Simple Random Sampling and Systematic Sampling
    Chapter 3: Simple Random Sampling and Systematic Sampling Simple random sampling and systematic sampling provide the foundation for almost all of the more complex sampling designs that are based on probability sampling. They are also usually the easiest designs to implement. These two designs highlight a trade-off inherent in all sampling designs: do we select sample units at random to minimize the risk of introducing biases into the sample or do we select sample units systematically to ensure that sample units are well- distributed throughout the population? Both designs involve selecting n sample units from the N units in the population and can be implemented with or without replacement. Simple Random Sampling When the population of interest is relatively homogeneous then simple random sampling works well, which means it provides estimates that are unbiased and have high precision. When little is known about a population in advance, such as in a pilot study, simple random sampling is a common design choice. Advantages: • Easy to implement • Requires little advance knowledge about the target population Disadvantages: • Imprecise relative to other designs if the population is heterogeneous • More expensive to implement than other designs if entities are clumped and the cost to travel among units is appreciable How it is implemented: • Select n sample units at random from N available in the population All units within the population must have the same probability of being selected, therefore each and every sample of size n drawn from the population has an equal chance of being selected. There are many strategies available for selecting a random sample.
    [Show full text]
  • Coverage Bias in European Telephone Surveys: Developments of Landline and Mobile Phone Coverage Across Countries and Over Time
    www.ssoar.info Coverage Bias in European Telephone Surveys: Developments of Landline and Mobile Phone Coverage across Countries and over Time Mohorko, Anja; Leeuw, Edith de; Hox, Joop Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Mohorko, A., Leeuw, E. d., & Hox, J. (2013). Coverage Bias in European Telephone Surveys: Developments of Landline and Mobile Phone Coverage across Countries and over Time. Survey Methods: Insights from the Field, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.13094/SMIF-2013-00002 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY-NC-ND Lizenz This document is made available under a CC BY-NC-ND Licence (Namensnennung-Nicht-kommerziell-Keine Bearbeitung) zur (Attribution-Non Comercial-NoDerivatives). For more Information Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den CC-Lizenzen finden see: Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de Diese Version ist zitierbar unter / This version is citable under: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-333873 Survey Methods: Insights from the Field Anja Mohorko, Department of Methodology and Statistics, Utrecht University Edith de Leeuw, Department of Methodology and Statistics, Utrecht University Joop Hox, Department of Methodology and Statistics, Utrecht University 25.01.2013 How to cite this article: Mohorko, A., de Leeuw, E., & Hox, J. (2013). Coverage Bias in European Telephone Surveys: Developments of Landline and Mobile Phone Coverage across Countries and over Time. Survey Methods: Insights from the Field. Retrieved from http://surveyinsights.org/?p=828 Abstract With the decrease of landline phones in the last decade, telephone survey methodologists face a new challenge to overcome coverage bias.
    [Show full text]
  • A Total Survey Error Perspective on Comparative Surveys
    A Total Survey Error Perspective on Comparative Surveys October 2nd 2014 – ITSEW – Washington DC Beth-Ellen Pennell, University of Michigan Lars Lyberg, Stockholm University Peter Mohler, University of Mannheim Kristen Cibelli Hibben, University of Michigan (presenting author) Gelaye Worku, Stockholm University © 2014 by the Regents of the University of Michigan Presentation Outline 1. Background 2. Integrated Total Survey Error Model Contribution to Errors: Representation: Coverage, Sampling, Nonresponse errors Measurement: Validity, Measurement errors Measurement error – expanded view 3. Conclusion © 2014 by the Regents of the University of Michigan Background 1. The scope, scale, and number of multicultural, multiregional or multinational (3M) surveys continues to grow a. Examples: European Social Survey (20+ countries), the World Values Survey (75+ countries), the Gallup World Poll (160 countries) 2. The purpose is comparability – An estimate for one country should be reasonably comparable to another. 3. However, comparability in 3M surveys is affected by various error sources that we are used to considering plus some additional ones. © 2014 by the Regents of the University of Michigan Background, continued… 1. 3M surveys have an error typology that differs from monocultural surveys. a. Error sources in 3M surveys are typically amplified b. 3M surveys often require additional operations – i.e. adaptation, translation 2. Few attempts have been made to adapt the TSE framework to 3M surveys (except see: Smith’s (2011) refined TSE model). 3. The proposed TSE typology integrates error sources – and associated methodological and operational challenges that may limit comparability. © 2014 by the Regents of the University of Michigan Total Survey Error (Groves et al., 2004) © 2014 by the Regents of the University of Michigan An Integrated TSE Model Some general points: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 8: Sampling Methods
    Lecture 8: Sampling Methods Donglei Du ([email protected]) Faculty of Business Administration, University of New Brunswick, NB Canada Fredericton E3B 9Y2 Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 1 / 30 Table of contents 1 Sampling Methods Why Sampling Probability vs non-probability sampling methods Sampling with replacement vs without replacement Random Sampling Methods 2 Simple random sampling with and without replacement Simple random sampling without replacement Simple random sampling with replacement 3 Sampling error vs non-sampling error 4 Sampling distribution of sample statistic Histogram of the sample mean under SRR 5 Distribution of the sample mean under SRR: The central limit theorem Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 2 / 30 Layout 1 Sampling Methods Why Sampling Probability vs non-probability sampling methods Sampling with replacement vs without replacement Random Sampling Methods 2 Simple random sampling with and without replacement Simple random sampling without replacement Simple random sampling with replacement 3 Sampling error vs non-sampling error 4 Sampling distribution of sample statistic Histogram of the sample mean under SRR 5 Distribution of the sample mean under SRR: The central limit theorem Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 3 / 30 Why sampling? The physical impossibility of checking all items in the population, and, also, it would be too time-consuming The studying of all the items in a population would not be cost effective The sample results are usually adequate The destructive nature of certain tests Donglei Du (UNB) ADM 2623: Business Statistics 4 / 30 Sampling Methods Probability Sampling: Each data unit in the population has a known likelihood of being included in the sample.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethical Considerations in the Total Survey Error Context
    Ethical Considerations in the Total Survey Error Context Julie de Jong 3MCII International Conference July 26-29, 2016 Chicago, Illinois © 2014 by the Regents of the University of Michigan Acknowledgements • Invited paper in Advances in Comparative Survey Methods: Multicultural, Multinational and Multiregional Contexts (3MC), edited by T.P. Johnson, B.E. Pennell, I.A.L. Stoop, & B. Dorer. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. • Special thanks to Kirsten Alcser, Christopher Antoun, Ashley Bowers, Judi Clemens, Christina Lien, Steve Pennell, and Kristen Cibelli Hibben who contributed substantially to earlier iterations of the chapter “Ethical Considerations” in the Cross-Cultural Survey Guidelines from which this chapter draws material. © 2014 by the Regents of the University of Michigan Overview – Legal and professional regulations and socio-political contexts can lead to differences in how ethical protocols are realized across countries. – Differences in the implementation of ethical standards contributes to the sources of total survey error (TSE) • TSE describes statistical properties of survey estimates by incorporating a variety of error sources and is used in the survey design stage, in the data collection process, and evaluation and post survey adjustments (Groves & Lyberg, 2010) • The TSE framework is generally used to design and evaluate a single-country survey – The framework has been extended to 3MC surveys and the impact of TSE on overall comparison error (Smith 2011) 3 © 2014 by the Regents of the University of Michigan Objectives
    [Show full text]
  • Survey Design
    1 Survey Design Target population: The scope of ACES is to capture investment by all domestic, private, non-farm businesses, including agricultural non-farm business and businesses without employees. Investment made after applying for an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) but before having any payroll or receipts is also included. Major exclusions are foreign operations of U.S. businesses, businesses in the U.S. territories, government operations (including the U.S. Postal Service), agricultural production companies and private households. Sampling frame: ACES collects information at the company level. The records of how the company invests are maintained at the headquarters level, and not at the location of each physical operating location. Companies may elect to have divisions within the company report, but the sampling unit and tabulation unit will be the company. A company’s importance to the survey depends on their employment, payroll, and their business activity. The greater the number of employees or the larger the payroll, the more likely, in general, a company is to be selected in the sample. The influence that the amount of payroll has on the likelihood of selection is adjusted by the business activity such that two companies with similar payroll but in different business activities will not have the same likelihood of selection. This is done to improve the quality of the estimates from any particular ACES specific industry code for business activities. Estimates are from two distinct samples from distinct frames. The first frame collects in-scope companies with employees. Companies sampled from this frame will receive an ACE-1 form, and the frame and sample are the ACE-1 frame and sample, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Standards and Guidelines for Reporting on Coverage Martin Provost Statistics Canada R
    Standards and Guidelines for Reporting on Coverage Martin Provost Statistics Canada R. H. Coats Building, 15th Floor, Tunney’s Pasture, Ottawa ONT, Canada, K1A 0T6, [email protected] Key Words: Quality indicators, coverage, ideal, target, survey and frame populations 1. Introduction The level of coverage provided by a survey or a statistical program has a major impact on the overall quality of the survey process. It is therefore important that users of the survey data be informed of the coverage quality provided by the survey and of any potential problem associated with identified defects in terms of coverage. Those measures of coverage add to the set of quality indicators that together provide a complete picture that facilitate an adequate use of the survey data and an optimization of the survey resources to allow for its constant improvement. But how should one define coverage (based on what units, etc.)? And how should survey managers report on it? This paper outlines the content and describes the procedures, issues and topics which will have to be covered in standards and guidelines for reporting on coverage at Statistics Canada to standardize the terminology, the definitions and the measures relating to these coverage issues. These standards and guidelines have been proposed for inclusion in Statistics Canada's Quality Assurance Framework as a supplement to this agency's Policy on Informing Users of Data Quality and Methodology. 2. Statistics Canada’s Quality Assurance Framework Statistics Canada (STC) has always invested considerable effort in achieving an adequate level of quality for all of its products and services.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey Coverage
    MEMBERS OF THE FEDERAL COMMITTEE ON STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY (April 1990) Maria E. Gonzalez (Chair) office of Management and Budget Yvonne M. Bishop Daniel Kasprzyk Energy Information Bureau of the Census Administration Daniel Melnick Warren L. Buckler National Science Foundation Social Security Administration Robert P. Parker Charles E. Caudill Bureau of Economic Analysis National Agricultural Statistical Service David A. Pierce Federal Reserve Board John E. Cremeans Office of Business Analysis Thomas J. Plewes Bureau of Labor Statistics Zahava D. Doering Smithsonian Institution Wesley L. Schaible Bureau of Labor Statistics Joseph K. Garrett Bureau of the Census Fritz J. Scheuren Internal Revenue service Robert M. Groves Bureau of the Census Monroe G. Sirken National Center for Health C. Terry Ireland Statistics National Computer Security Center Robert D. Tortora Bureau of the Census Charles D. Jones Bureau of the Census PREFACE The Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology was organized by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 1975 to investigate methodological issues in Federal statistics. Members of the committee, selected by OMB on the basis of their individual expertise and interest in statistical methods, serve in their personal capacity rather than as agency representatives. The committee conducts its work through subcommittees that are organized to study particular issues and that are open to any Federal employee who wishes to participate in the studies. working papers are prepared by the subcommittee members and reflect only their individual and collective ideas. The Subcommittee on Survey Coverage studied the survey errors that can seriously bias sample survey data because of undercoverage of certain subpopulations or because of overcoverage of other subpopulations.
    [Show full text]
  • STANDARDS and GUIDELINES for STATISTICAL SURVEYS September 2006
    OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR STATISTICAL SURVEYS September 2006 Table of Contents LIST OF STANDARDS FOR STATISTICAL SURVEYS ....................................................... i INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 1 DEVELOPMENT OF CONCEPTS, METHODS, AND DESIGN .................. 5 Section 1.1 Survey Planning..................................................................................................... 5 Section 1.2 Survey Design........................................................................................................ 7 Section 1.3 Survey Response Rates.......................................................................................... 8 Section 1.4 Pretesting Survey Systems..................................................................................... 9 SECTION 2 COLLECTION OF DATA................................................................................... 9 Section 2.1 Developing Sampling Frames................................................................................ 9 Section 2.2 Required Notifications to Potential Survey Respondents.................................... 10 Section 2.3 Data Collection Methodology.............................................................................. 11 SECTION 3 PROCESSING AND EDITING OF DATA...................................................... 13 Section 3.1 Data Editing ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]