Analysis
Filter results by
Search HelpKeyword(s)
Subject
Author(s)
Results
All (6)
All (6) ((6 results))
- Stats in brief: 89-20-00062022004Description:
Gathering, exploring, analyzing and interpreting data are essential steps in producing information that benefits society, the economy and the environment. In this video, we will discuss the importance of considering data ethics throughout the process of producing statistical information.
As a pre-requisite to this video, make sure to watch the video titled “Data Ethics: An introduction” also available in Statistics Canada’s data literacy training catalogue.
Release date: 2022-10-17 - Stats in brief: 89-20-00062022005Description:
In this video, you will learn the answers to the following questions: What are the different types of error? What are the types of error that lead to statistical bias? Where during the data journey statistical bias can occur?
Release date: 2022-10-17 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200100006Description:
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 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900100009Description:
The demand for small area estimates by users of Statistics Canada’s data has been steadily increasing over recent years. In this paper, we provide a summary of procedures that have been incorporated into a SAS based production system for producing official small area estimates at Statistics Canada. This system includes: procedures based on unit or area level models; the incorporation of the sampling design; the ability to smooth the design variance for each small area if an area level model is used; the ability to ensure that the small area estimates add up to reliable higher level estimates; and the development of diagnostic tools to test the adequacy of the model. The production system has been used to produce small area estimates on an experimental basis for several surveys at Statistics Canada that include: the estimation of health characteristics, the estimation of under-coverage in the census, the estimation of manufacturing sales and the estimation of unemployment rates and employment counts for the Labour Force Survey. Some of the diagnostics implemented in the system are illustrated using Labour Force Survey data along with administrative auxiliary data.
Release date: 2019-05-07 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201000111246Description:
Many surveys employ weight adjustment procedures to reduce nonresponse bias. These adjustments make use of available auxiliary data. This paper addresses the issue of jackknife variance estimation for estimators that have been adjusted for nonresponse. Using the reverse approach for variance estimation proposed by Fay (1991) and Shao and Steel (1999), we study the effect of not re-calculating the nonresponse weight adjustment within each jackknife replicate. We show that the resulting 'shortcut' jackknife variance estimator tends to overestimate the true variance of point estimators in the case of several weight adjustment procedures used in practice. These theoretical results are confirmed through a simulation study where we compare the shortcut jackknife variance estimator with the full jackknife variance estimator obtained by re-calculating the nonresponse weight adjustment within each jackknife replicate.
Release date: 2010-06-29 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X199600114388Description:
Variance estimation for the poststratified estimator and the generalized regression estimator of a total under stratified multi-stage sampling is considered. By linearizing the jackknife variance estimator, a jackknife linearization variance estimator is obtained which is different from the standard linearization variance estimator. This variance estimator is computationally simpler than the jackknife variance estimator and yet leads to values close to the jackknife. Properties of the jackknife linearization variance estimator, the standard linearized variance estimator, and the jackknife variance estimator are studied through a simulation study. All of the variance estimators performed well both unconditionally and conditionally given a measure of how far away the estimated totals of auxiliary variables are from the known population totals. A jackknife variance estimator based on incorrect reweighting performed poorly, indicating the importance of correct reweighting when using the jackknife method.
Release date: 1996-06-14
Stats in brief (2)
Stats in brief (2) ((2 results))
- Stats in brief: 89-20-00062022004Description:
Gathering, exploring, analyzing and interpreting data are essential steps in producing information that benefits society, the economy and the environment. In this video, we will discuss the importance of considering data ethics throughout the process of producing statistical information.
As a pre-requisite to this video, make sure to watch the video titled “Data Ethics: An introduction” also available in Statistics Canada’s data literacy training catalogue.
Release date: 2022-10-17 - Stats in brief: 89-20-00062022005Description:
In this video, you will learn the answers to the following questions: What are the different types of error? What are the types of error that lead to statistical bias? Where during the data journey statistical bias can occur?
Release date: 2022-10-17
Articles and reports (4)
Articles and reports (4) ((4 results))
- Articles and reports: 12-001-X202200100006Description:
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 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900100009Description:
The demand for small area estimates by users of Statistics Canada’s data has been steadily increasing over recent years. In this paper, we provide a summary of procedures that have been incorporated into a SAS based production system for producing official small area estimates at Statistics Canada. This system includes: procedures based on unit or area level models; the incorporation of the sampling design; the ability to smooth the design variance for each small area if an area level model is used; the ability to ensure that the small area estimates add up to reliable higher level estimates; and the development of diagnostic tools to test the adequacy of the model. The production system has been used to produce small area estimates on an experimental basis for several surveys at Statistics Canada that include: the estimation of health characteristics, the estimation of under-coverage in the census, the estimation of manufacturing sales and the estimation of unemployment rates and employment counts for the Labour Force Survey. Some of the diagnostics implemented in the system are illustrated using Labour Force Survey data along with administrative auxiliary data.
Release date: 2019-05-07 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201000111246Description:
Many surveys employ weight adjustment procedures to reduce nonresponse bias. These adjustments make use of available auxiliary data. This paper addresses the issue of jackknife variance estimation for estimators that have been adjusted for nonresponse. Using the reverse approach for variance estimation proposed by Fay (1991) and Shao and Steel (1999), we study the effect of not re-calculating the nonresponse weight adjustment within each jackknife replicate. We show that the resulting 'shortcut' jackknife variance estimator tends to overestimate the true variance of point estimators in the case of several weight adjustment procedures used in practice. These theoretical results are confirmed through a simulation study where we compare the shortcut jackknife variance estimator with the full jackknife variance estimator obtained by re-calculating the nonresponse weight adjustment within each jackknife replicate.
Release date: 2010-06-29 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X199600114388Description:
Variance estimation for the poststratified estimator and the generalized regression estimator of a total under stratified multi-stage sampling is considered. By linearizing the jackknife variance estimator, a jackknife linearization variance estimator is obtained which is different from the standard linearization variance estimator. This variance estimator is computationally simpler than the jackknife variance estimator and yet leads to values close to the jackknife. Properties of the jackknife linearization variance estimator, the standard linearized variance estimator, and the jackknife variance estimator are studied through a simulation study. All of the variance estimators performed well both unconditionally and conditionally given a measure of how far away the estimated totals of auxiliary variables are from the known population totals. A jackknife variance estimator based on incorrect reweighting performed poorly, indicating the importance of correct reweighting when using the jackknife method.
Release date: 1996-06-14
Journals and periodicals (0)
Journals and periodicals (0) (0 results)
No content available at this time.
- Date modified: