Survey Methodology

View the most recent version.

December 2011

Content note: At this moment, full content is available in PDF only. A print version can also be ordered.

To access the PDF publication, please use the "Full content in PDF" link on the sidebar (on the left-hand side of this page).

Accessibility notice: If the following information is not accessible to you, please contact us for assistance or to obtain it in alternate formats.

---

The journal Survey Methodology Volume 37, Number 2 (December 2011) contains the following 9 papers:

Waksberg Invited Paper Series:

Modelling of complex survey data: Why model? Why is it a problem? How can we approach it?

Danny Pfeffermann

Abstract

This article attempts to answer the three questions appearing in the title. It starts by discussing unique features of complex survey data not shared by other data sets, which require special attention but suggest a large variety of diverse inference procedures. Next a large number of different approaches proposed in the literature for handling these features are reviewed with discussion on their merits and limitations. The approaches differ in the conditions underlying their use, additional data required for their application, goodness of fit testing, the inference objectives that they accommodate, statistical efficiency, computational demands, and the skills required from analysts fitting the model. The last part of the paper presents simulation results, which compare the approaches when estimating linear regression coefficients from a stratified sample in terms of bias, variance, and coverage rates. It concludes with a short discussion of pending issues.

Regular Papers:

A Bayesian analysis of small area probabilities under a constraint

Balgobin Nandram and Hasanjan Sayit

Abstract

In many sample surveys there are items requesting binary response (e.g., obese, not obese) from a number of small areas. Inference is required about the probability for a positive response (e.g., obese) in each area, the probability being the same for all individuals in each area and different across areas. Because of the sparseness of the data within areas, direct estimators are not reliable, and there is a need to use data from other areas to improve inference for a specific area. Essentially, a priori the areas are assumed to be similar, and a hierarchical Bayesian model, the standard beta-binomial model, is a natural choice. The innovation is that a practitioner may have much-needed additional prior information about a linear combination of the probabilities. For example, a weighted average of the probabilities is a parameter, and information can be elicited about this parameter, thereby making the Bayesian paradigm appropriate. We have modified the standard beta-binomial model for small areas to incorporate the prior information on the linear combination of the probabilities, which we call a constraint. Thus, there are three cases. The practitioner (a) does not specify a constraint, (b) specifies a constraint and the parameter completely, and (c) specifies a constraint and information which can be used to construct a prior distribution for the parameter. The griddy Gibbs sampler is used to fit the models. To illustrate our method, we use an example on obesity of children in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in which the small areas are formed by crossing school (middle, high), ethnicity (white, black, Mexican) and gender (male, female). We use a simulation study to assess some of the statistical features of our method. We have shown that the gain in precision beyond (a) is in the order with (b) larger than (c).

On bias-robust mean squared error estimation for pseudo-linear small area estimators

Ray Chambers, Hukum Chandra and Nikos Tzavidis

Abstract

We propose a method of mean squared error (MSE) estimation for estimators of finite population domain means that can be expressed in pseudo-linear form,i.e., as weighted sums of sample values. In particular, it can be used for estimating the MSE of the empirical best linear unbiased predictor, the model-based direct estimator and the M-quantile predictor. The proposed method represents an extension of the ideas in Royall and Cumberland (1978) and leads to MSE estimators that are simpler to implement, and potentially more bias-robust, than those suggested in the small area literature. However, it should be noted that the MSE estimators defined using this method can also exhibit large variability when the area-specific sample sizes are very small. We illustrate the performance of the method through extensive model-based and design-based simulation, with the latter based on two realistic survey data sets containing small area information.

Variance estimation under composite imputation: The methodology behind SEVANI

Jean-François Beaumont and Joël Bissonnette

Abstract

Composite imputation is often used in business surveys. The term "composite" means that more than a single imputation method is used to impute missing values for a variable of interest. The literature on variance estimation in the presence of composite imputation is rather limited. To deal with this problem, we consider an extension of the methodology developed by Särndal (1992). Our extension is quite general and easy to implement provided that linear imputation methods are used to fill in the missing values. This class of imputation methods contains linear regression imputation, donor imputation and auxiliary value imputation, sometimes called cold-deck or substitution imputation. It thus covers the most common methods used by national statistical agencies for the imputation of missing values. Our methodology has been implemented in the System for the Estimation of Variance due to Nonresponse and Imputation (SEVANI) developed at Statistics Canada. Its performance is evaluated in a simulation study.

Special Section of the US Census Bureau:

Introduction

Alternative demographic sample designs being explored at the U.S. Census Bureau

Patrick E. Flanagan and Ruth Ann Killion

Abstract

This paper introduces a US Census Bureau special compilation by presenting four other papers of the current issue: three papers from authors Tillé, Lohr and Thompson as well as a discussion paper from Opsomer.

Special Section Papers

Adaptive network and spatial sampling

Steve Thompson

Abstract

This paper describes recent developments in adaptive sampling strategies and introduces new variations on those strategies. Recent developments described included targeted random walk designs and adaptive web sampling. These designs are particularly suited for sampling in networks; for example, for finding a sample of people from a hidden human population by following social links from sample individuals to find additional members of the hidden population to add to the sample. Each of these designs can also be translated into spatial settings to produce flexible new spatial adaptive strategies for sampling unevenly distributed populations. Variations on these sampling strategies include versions in which the network or spatial links have unequal weights and are followed with unequal probabilities.

Alternative survey sample designs: Sampling with multiple overlapping frames

Sharon L. Lohr

Abstract

Designs and estimators for the single frame surveys currently used by U.S. government agencies were developed in response to practical problems. Federal household surveys now face challenges of decreasing response rates and frame coverage, higher data collection costs, and increasing demand for small area statistics. Multiple frame surveys, in which independent samples are drawn from separate frames, can be used to help meet some of these challenges. Examples include combining a list frame with an area frame or using two frames to sample landline telephone households and cellular telephone households. We review point estimators and weight adjustments that can be used to analyze multiple frame surveys with standard survey software, and summarize construction of replicate weights for variance estimation. Because of their increased complexity, multiple frame surveys face some challenges not found in single frame surveys. We investigate misclassification bias in multiple frame surveys, and propose a method for correcting for this bias when misclassification probabilities are known. Finally, we discuss research that is needed on nonsampling errors with multiple frame surveys.

Ten years of balanced sampling with the cube method: An appraisal

Yves Tillé

Abstract

This paper presents a review and assessment of the use of balanced sampling by means of the cube method. After defining the notion of balanced sample and balanced sampling, a short history of the concept of balancing is presented. The theory of the cube method is briefly presented. Emphasis is placed on the practical problems posed by balanced sampling: the interest of the method with respect to other sampling methods and calibration, the field of application, the accuracy of balancing, the choice of auxiliary variables and ways to implement the method.

Discussion

Innovations in survey sampling design: Discussion of three contributions presented at the U.S. Census Bureau

Jean Opsomer

Abstract

In this paper, a discussion of the three papers from the US Census Bureau special compilation is presented.