Response and nonresponse

Skip to main content
Skip to footer

Language selection

Français

Search and menus

Search and menus

Search

Skip to filters. View results.

Results

All (136)

All (136) (10 to 20 of 136 results)

11. A method to correct for frame membership error in dual frame estimators
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900300008
Description:
Dual frame surveys are useful when no single frame with adequate coverage exists. However estimators from dual frame designs require knowledge of the frame memberships of each sampled unit. When this information is not available from the frame itself, it is often collected from the respondent. When respondents provide incorrect membership information, the resulting estimators of means or totals can be biased. A method for reducing this bias, using accurate membership information obtained about a subsample of respondents, is proposed. The properties of the new estimator are examined and compared to alternative estimators. The proposed estimator is applied to the data from the motivating example, which was a recreational angler survey, using an address frame and an incomplete fishing license frame.
Release date: 2019-12-17
12. Multiple imputation of missing values in household data with structural zeros
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900200005
Description:
We present an approach for imputation of missing items in multivariate categorical data nested within households. The approach relies on a latent class model that (i) allows for household-level and individual-level variables, (ii) ensures that impossible household configurations have zero probability in the model, and (iii) can preserve multivariate distributions both within households and across households. We present a Gibbs sampler for estimating the model and generating imputations. We also describe strategies for improving the computational efficiency of the model estimation. We illustrate the performance of the approach with data that mimic the variables collected in typical population censuses.
Release date: 2019-06-27
13. An assessment of accuracy improvement by adaptive survey design
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900200008
Description:
High nonresponse occurs in many sample surveys today, including important surveys carried out by government statistical agencies. An adaptive data collection can be advantageous in those conditions: Lower nonresponse bias in survey estimates can be gained, up to a point, by producing a well-balanced set of respondents. Auxiliary variables serve a twofold purpose: Used in the estimation phase, through calibrated adjustment weighting, they reduce, but do not entirely remove, the bias. In the preceding adaptive data collection phase, auxiliary variables also play a major role: They are instrumental in reducing the imbalance in the ultimate set of respondents. For such combined use of auxiliary variables, the deviation of the calibrated estimate from the unbiased estimate (under full response) is studied in the article. We show that this deviation is a sum of two components. The reducible component can be decreased through adaptive data collection, all the way to zero if perfectly balanced response is realized with respect to a chosen auxiliary vector. By contrast, the resisting component changes little or not at all by a better balanced response; it represents a part of the deviation that adaptive design does not get rid of. The relative size of the former component is an indicator of the potential payoff from an adaptive survey design.
Release date: 2019-06-27
14. Estimation of response propensities and indicators of representative response using population-level information
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900200009
Description:
In recent years, there has been a strong interest in indirect measures of nonresponse bias in surveys or other forms of data collection. This interest originates from gradually decreasing propensities to respond to surveys parallel to pressures on survey budgets. These developments led to a growing focus on the representativeness or balance of the responding sample units with respect to relevant auxiliary variables. One example of a measure is the representativeness indicator, or R-indicator. The R-indicator is based on the design-weighted sample variation of estimated response propensities. It pre-supposes linked auxiliary data. One of the criticisms of the indicator is that it cannot be used in settings where auxiliary information is available only at the population level. In this paper, we propose a new method for estimating response propensities that does not need auxiliary information for non-respondents to the survey and is based on population auxiliary information. These population-based response propensities can then be used to develop R-indicators that employ population contingency tables or population frequency counts. We discuss the statistical properties of the indicators, and evaluate their performance using an evaluation study based on real census data and an application from the Dutch Health Survey.
Release date: 2019-06-27
15. Empirical likelihood inference for missing survey data under unequal probability sampling Archived
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900100002
Description:
Item nonresponse is frequently encountered in sample surveys. Hot-deck imputation is commonly used to fill in missing item values within homogeneous groups called imputation classes. We propose a fractional hot-deck imputation procedure and an associated empirical likelihood for inference on the population mean of a function of a variable of interest with missing data under probability proportional to size sampling with negligible sampling fractions. We derive the limiting distributions of the maximum empirical likelihood estimator and empirical likelihood ratio, and propose two related asymptotically valid bootstrap procedures to construct confidence intervals for the population mean. Simulation studies show that the proposed bootstrap procedures outperform the customary bootstrap procedures which are shown to be asymptotically incorrect when the number of random draws in the fractional imputation is fixed. Moreover, the proposed bootstrap procedure based on the empirical likelihood ratio is seen to perform significantly better than the method based on the limiting distribution of the maximum empirical likelihood estimator when the inclusion probabilities vary considerably or when the sample size is not large.
Release date: 2019-05-07
16. Variance estimation under monotone non-response for a panel survey Archived
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201800254952
Description:
Panel surveys are frequently used to measure the evolution of parameters over time. Panel samples may suffer from different types of unit non-response, which is currently handled by estimating the response probabilities and by reweighting respondents. In this work, we consider estimation and variance estimation under unit non-response for panel surveys. Extending the work by Kim and Kim (2007) for several times, we consider a propensity score adjusted estimator accounting for initial non-response and attrition, and propose a suitable variance estimator. It is then extended to cover most estimators encountered in surveys, including calibrated estimators, complex parameters and longitudinal estimators. The properties of the proposed variance estimator and of a simplified variance estimator are estimated through a simulation study. An illustration of the proposed methods on data from the ELFE survey is also presented.
Release date: 2018-12-20
17. How to decompose the non-response variance: A total survey error approach Archived
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201800254957
Description:
When a linear imputation method is used to correct non-response based on certain assumptions, total variance can be assigned to non-responding units. Linear imputation is not as limited as it seems, given that the most common methods – ratio, donor, mean and auxiliary value imputation – are all linear imputation methods. We will discuss the inference framework and the unit-level decomposition of variance due to non-response. Simulation results will also be presented. This decomposition can be used to prioritize non-response follow-up or manual corrections, or simply to guide data analysis.
Release date: 2018-12-20
18. Strategies for subsampling nonrespondents for economic programs Archived
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201800154929
Description:
The U.S. Census Bureau is investigating nonrespondent subsampling strategies for usage in the 2017 Economic Census. Design constraints include a mandated lower bound on the unit response rate, along with targeted industry-specific response rates. This paper presents research on allocation procedures for subsampling nonrespondents, conditional on the subsampling being systematic. We consider two approaches: (1) equal-probability sampling and (2) optimized allocation with constraints on unit response rates and sample size with the objective of selecting larger samples in industries that have initially lower response rates. We present a simulation study that examines the relative bias and mean squared error for the proposed allocations, assessing each procedure’s sensitivity to the size of the subsample, the response propensities, and the estimation procedure.
Release date: 2018-06-21
19. A mixed latent class Markov approach for estimating labour market mobility with multiple indicators and retrospective interrogation Archived
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201700114820
Description:
Measurement errors can induce bias in the estimation of transitions, leading to erroneous conclusions about labour market dynamics. Traditional literature on gross flows estimation is based on the assumption that measurement errors are uncorrelated over time. This assumption is not realistic in many contexts, because of survey design and data collection strategies. In this work, we use a model-based approach to correct observed gross flows from classification errors with latent class Markov models. We refer to data collected with the Italian Continuous Labour Force Survey, which is cross-sectional, quarterly, with a 2-2-2 rotating design. The questionnaire allows us to use multiple indicators of labour force conditions for each quarter: two collected in the first interview, and a third collected one year later. Our approach provides a method to estimate labour market mobility, taking into account correlated errors and the rotating design of the survey. The best-fitting model is a mixed latent class Markov model with covariates affecting latent transitions and correlated errors among indicators; the mixture components are of mover-stayer type. The better fit of the mixture specification is due to more accurately estimated latent transitions.
Release date: 2017-06-22
20. A few remarks on a small example by Jean-Claude Deville regarding non-ignorable non-response Archived
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201600214661
Description:
An example presented by Jean-Claude Deville in 2005 is subjected to three estimation methods: the method of moments, the maximum likelihood method, and generalized calibration. The three methods yield exactly the same results for the two non-response models. A discussion follows on how to choose the most appropriate model.
Release date: 2016-12-20

Data (0)

Data (0) (0 results)

No content available at this time.

Analysis (135)

Analysis (135) (0 to 10 of 135 results)

1. Ensuring that the Labour Force Survey Remains the Cornerstone of Canada’s Labour Market Information Ecosystem
Articles and reports: 75-005-M2024001
Description: From 2010 to 2019, the Labour Force Survey (LFS) response rate – or the proportion of selected households who complete an LFS interview – had been on a slow downward trend, due to a range of social and technological changes which have made it more challenging to contact selected households and to persuade Canadians to participate when they are contacted. These factors were exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in the suspension of face-to-face interviewing between April 2020 and fall 2022. Statistics Canada is committed to restoring LFS response rates to the greatest extent possible. This technical paper discusses two initiatives that are underway to ensure that the LFS estimates continue to provide an accurate and representative portrait of the Canadian labour market.
Release date: 2024-02-16
2. Sample designs and estimators for multimode surveys with face-to-face data collection
Articles and reports: 12-001-X202300200006
Description: Survey researchers are increasingly turning to multimode data collection to deal with declines in survey response rates and increasing costs. An efficient approach offers the less costly modes (e.g., web) followed with a more expensive mode for a subsample of the units (e.g., households) within each primary sampling unit (PSU). We present two alternatives to this traditional design. One alternative subsamples PSUs rather than units to constrain costs. The second is a hybrid design that includes a clustered (two-stage) sample and an independent, unclustered sample. Using a simulation, we demonstrate the hybrid design has considerable advantages.
Release date: 2024-01-03
3. Attrition in the Longitudinal and International Study of Adults, Wave 1 (2012) to Wave 4 (2018)
Articles and reports: 89-648-X2022001
Description:
This report explores the size and nature of the attrition challenges faced by the Longitudinal and International Study of Adults (LISA) survey, as well as the use of a non-response weight adjustment and calibration strategy to mitigate the effects of attrition on the LISA estimates. The study focuses on data from waves 1 (2012) to 4 (2018) and uses practical examples based on selected demographic variables, to illustrate how attrition be assessed and treated.

Release date: 2022-11-14
4. Study: Attrition in the Longitudinal and International Study of Adults, Wave 1 (2012) to Wave 4 (2018)
Stats in brief: 11-001-X202231822683
Description: Release published in The Daily – Statistics Canada’s official release bulletin
Release date: 2022-11-14
5. Is undesirable answer behaviour consistent across surveys? An investigation into respondent characteristics
Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200100001
Description:
In this study, we investigate to what extent the respondent characteristics age and educational level may be associated with undesirable answer behaviour (UAB) consistently across surveys. We use data from panel respondents who participated in ten general population surveys of CentERdata and Statistics Netherlands. A new method to visually present UAB and an inventive adaptation of a non-parametric effect size measure are used. The occurrence of UAB of respondents with specific characteristics is summarized in density distributions that we refer to as respondent profiles. An adaptation of the robust effect size Cliff’s Delta is used to compare respondent profiles on the potentially consistent occurrence of UAB across surveys. Taking all surveys together, the degree of UAB varies by age and education. The results do not show consistent UAB across individual surveys: Age and educational level are associated with a relatively higher occurrence of UAB for some surveys, but a relatively lower occurrence for other surveys. We conclude that the occurrence of UAB across surveys may be more dependent on the survey and its items than on respondent’s cognitive ability.

Release date: 2022-06-21
6. Non-response follow-up for business surveys
Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200100006
Description:
In the last two decades, survey response rates have been steadily falling. In that context, it has become increasingly important for statistical agencies to develop and use methods that reduce the adverse effects of non-response on the accuracy of survey estimates. Follow-up of non-respondents may be an effective, albeit time and resource-intensive, remedy for non-response bias. We conducted a simulation study using real business survey data to shed some light on several questions about non-response follow-up. For instance, assuming a fixed non-response follow-up budget, what is the best way to select non-responding units to be followed up? How much effort should be dedicated to repeatedly following up non-respondents until a response is received? Should they all be followed up or a sample of them? If a sample is followed up, how should it be selected? We compared Monte Carlo relative biases and relative root mean square errors under different follow-up sampling designs, sample sizes and non-response scenarios. We also determined an expression for the minimum follow-up sample size required to expend the budget, on average, and showed that it maximizes the expected response rate. A main conclusion of our simulation experiment is that this sample size also appears to approximately minimize the bias and mean square error of the estimates.

Release date: 2022-06-21
7. Assessing the coverage of confidence intervals under nonresponse. A case study on income mean and quantiles in some municipalities from the 2015 Mexican Intercensal Survey
Articles and reports: 12-001-X202100200004
Description:
This note presents a comparative study of three methods for constructing confidence intervals for the mean and quantiles based on survey data with nonresponse. These methods, empirical likelihood, linearization, and that of Woodruff’s (1952), were applied to data on income obtained from the 2015 Mexican Intercensal Survey, and to simulated data. A response propensity model was used for adjusting the sampling weights, and the empirical performance of the methods was assessed in terms of the coverage of the confidence intervals through simulation studies. The empirical likelihood and linearization methods had a good performance for the mean, except when the variable of interest had some extreme values. For quantiles, the linearization method had a poor performance, while the empirical likelihood and Woodruff methods had a better one, though without reaching the nominal coverage when the variable of interest had values with high frequency near the quantile of interest.
Release date: 2022-01-06
8. A note on propensity score weighting method using paradata in survey sampling
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900300002
Description:
Paradata is often collected during the survey process to monitor the quality of the survey response. One such paradata is a respondent behavior, which can be used to construct response models. The propensity score weight using the respondent behavior information can be applied to the final analysis to reduce the nonresponse bias. However, including the surrogate variable in the propensity score weighting does not always guarantee the efficiency gain. We show that the surrogate variable is useful only when it is correlated with the study variable. Results from a limited simulation study confirm the finding. A real data application using the Korean Workplace Panel Survey data is also presented.
Release date: 2019-12-17
9. "Optimal" calibration weights under unit nonresponse in survey sampling
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900300006
Description:
High nonresponse is a very common problem in sample surveys today. In statistical terms we are worried about increased bias and variance of estimators for population quantities such as totals or means. Different methods have been suggested in order to compensate for this phenomenon. We can roughly divide them into imputation and calibration and it is the latter approach we will focus on here. A wide spectrum of possibilities is included in the class of calibration estimators. We explore linear calibration, where we suggest using a nonresponse version of the design-based optimal regression estimator. Comparisons are made between this estimator and a GREG type estimator. Distance measures play a very important part in the construction of calibration estimators. We show that an estimator of the average response propensity (probability) can be included in the “optimal” distance measure under nonresponse, which will help to reduce the bias of the resulting estimator. To illustrate empirically the theoretically derived results for the suggested estimators, a simulation study has been carried out. The population is called KYBOK and consists of clerical municipalities in Sweden, where the variables include financial as well as size measurements. The results are encouraging for the “optimal” estimator in combination with the estimated average response propensity, where the bias was reduced for most of the Poisson sampling cases in the study.
Release date: 2019-12-17
10. A method to correct for frame membership error in dual frame estimators
Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900300008
Description:
Dual frame surveys are useful when no single frame with adequate coverage exists. However estimators from dual frame designs require knowledge of the frame memberships of each sampled unit. When this information is not available from the frame itself, it is often collected from the respondent. When respondents provide incorrect membership information, the resulting estimators of means or totals can be biased. A method for reducing this bias, using accurate membership information obtained about a subsample of respondents, is proposed. The properties of the new estimator are examined and compared to alternative estimators. The proposed estimator is applied to the data from the motivating example, which was a recreational angler survey, using an address frame and an incomplete fishing license frame.
Release date: 2019-12-17

Reference (1)

Reference (1) ((1 result))

1. Labour Force Survey Response Rates, September 2023
Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 75-005-M2023001
Description: This document provides information on the evolution of response rates for the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and a discussion of the evaluation of two aspects of data quality that ensure the LFS estimates continue providing an accurate portrait of the Canadian labour market.
Release date: 2023-10-30

Report a problem or mistake on this page

Date modified:: 2024-05-23