Response and nonresponse
Filter results by
Search HelpKeyword(s)
Survey or statistical program
Results
All (22)
All (22) (0 to 10 of 22 results)
- Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900300008Description:
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 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900200008Description:
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 - 3. Tests for evaluating nonresponse bias in surveys ArchivedArticles and reports: 12-001-X201600214677Description:
How do we tell whether weighting adjustments reduce nonresponse bias? If a variable is measured for everyone in the selected sample, then the design weights can be used to calculate an approximately unbiased estimate of the population mean or total for that variable. A second estimate of the population mean or total can be calculated using the survey respondents only, with weights that have been adjusted for nonresponse. If the two estimates disagree, then there is evidence that the weight adjustments may not have removed the nonresponse bias for that variable. In this paper we develop the theoretical properties of linearization and jackknife variance estimators for evaluating the bias of an estimated population mean or total by comparing estimates calculated from overlapping subsets of the same data with different sets of weights, when poststratification or inverse propensity weighting is used for the nonresponse adjustments to the weights. We provide sufficient conditions on the population, sample, and response mechanism for the variance estimators to be consistent, and demonstrate their small-sample properties through a simulation study.
Release date: 2016-12-20 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201500114172Description:
When a random sample drawn from a complete list frame suffers from unit nonresponse, calibration weighting to population totals can be used to remove nonresponse bias under either an assumed response (selection) or an assumed prediction (outcome) model. Calibration weighting in this way can not only provide double protection against nonresponse bias, it can also decrease variance. By employing a simple trick one can estimate the variance under the assumed prediction model and the mean squared error under the combination of an assumed response model and the probability-sampling mechanism simultaneously. Unfortunately, there is a practical limitation on what response model can be assumed when design weights are calibrated to population totals in a single step. In particular, the choice for the response function cannot always be logistic. That limitation does not hinder calibration weighting when performed in two steps: from the respondent sample to the full sample to remove the response bias and then from the full sample to the population to decrease variance. There are potential efficiency advantages from using the two-step approach as well even when the calibration variables employed in each step is a subset of the calibration variables in the single step. Simultaneous mean-squared-error estimation using linearization is possible, but more complicated than when calibrating in a single step.
Release date: 2015-06-29 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201100111443Description:
Dual frame telephone surveys are becoming common in the U.S. because of the incompleteness of the landline frame as people transition to cell phones. This article examines nonsampling errors in dual frame telephone surveys. Even though nonsampling errors are ignored in much of the dual frame literature, we find that under some conditions substantial biases may arise in dual frame telephone surveys due to these errors. We specifically explore biases due to nonresponse and measurement error in these telephone surveys. To reduce the bias resulting from these errors, we propose dual frame sampling and weighting methods. The compositing factor for combining the estimates from the two frames is shown to play an important role in reducing nonresponse bias.
Release date: 2011-06-29 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201000211376Description:
This article develops computational tools, called indicators, for judging the effectiveness of the auxiliary information used to control nonresponse bias in survey estimates, obtained in this article by calibration. This work is motivated by the survey environment in a number of countries, notably in northern Europe, where many potential auxiliary variables are derived from reliable administrative registers for household and individuals. Many auxiliary vectors can be composed. There is a need to compare these vectors to assess their potential for reducing bias. The indicators in this article are designed to meet that need. They are used in surveys at Statistics Sweden. General survey conditions are considered: There is probability sampling from the finite population, by an arbitrary sampling design; nonresponse occurs. The probability of inclusion in the sample is known for each population unit; the probability of response is unknown, causing bias. The study variable (the y-variable) is observed for the set of respondents only. No matter what auxiliary vector is used in a calibration estimator (or in any other estimation method), a residual bias will always remain. The choice of a "best possible" auxiliary vector is guided by the indicators proposed in the article. Their background and computational features are described in the early sections of the article. Their theoretical background is explained. The concluding sections are devoted to empirical studies. One of these illustrates the selection of auxiliary variables in a survey at Statistics Sweden. A second empirical illustration is a simulation with a constructed finite population; a number of potential auxiliary vectors are ranked in order of preference with the aid of the indicators.
Release date: 2010-12-21 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X200900211038Description:
We examine overcoming the overestimation in using generalized weight share method (GWSM) caused by link nonresponse in indirect sampling. A few adjustment methods incorporating link nonresponse in using GWSM have been constructed for situations both with and without the availability of auxiliary variables. A simulation study on a longitudinal survey is presented using some of the adjustment methods we recommend. The simulation results show that these adjusted GWSMs perform well in reducing both estimation bias and variance. The advancement in bias reduction is significant.
Release date: 2009-12-23 - 8. Nonresponse bias analysis using reluctant respondents who responded after receiving monetary incentives ArchivedArticles and reports: 11-522-X200800010953Description:
As survey researchers attempt to maintain traditionally high response rates, reluctant respondents have resulted in increasing data collection costs. This respondent reluctance may be related to the amount of time it takes to complete an interview in large-scale, multi-purpose surveys, such as the National Survey of Recent College Graduates (NSRCG). Recognizing that respondent burden or questionnaire length may contribute to lower response rates, in 2003, following several months of data collection under the standard data collection protocol, the NSRCG offered its nonrespondents monetary incentives about two months before the end of the data collection,. In conjunction with the incentive offer, the NSRCG also offered persistent nonrespondents an opportunity to complete a much-abbreviated interview consisting of a few critical items. The late respondents who completed the interviews as the result of the incentive and critical items-only questionnaire offers may provide some insight into the issue of nonresponse bias and the likelihood that such interviewees would have remained survey nonrespondents if these refusal conversion efforts had not been made.
In this paper, we define "reluctant respondents" as those who responded to the survey only after extra efforts were made beyond the ones initially planned in the standard data collection protocol. Specifically, reluctant respondents in the 2003 NSRCG are those who responded to the regular or shortened questionnaire following the incentive offer. Our conjecture was that the behavior of the reluctant respondents would be more like that of nonrespondents than of respondents to the surveys. This paper describes an investigation of reluctant respondents and the extent to which they are different from regular respondents. We compare different response groups on several key survey estimates. This comparison will expand our understanding of nonresponse bias in the NSRCG, and of the characteristics of nonrespondents themselves, thus providing a basis for changes in the NSRCG weighting system or estimation procedures in the future.
Release date: 2009-12-03 - Articles and reports: 11-522-X200800010996Description:
In recent years, the use of paradata has become increasingly important to the management of collection activities at Statistics Canada. Particular attention has been paid to social surveys conducted over the phone, like the Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics (SLID). For recent SLID data collections, the number of call attempts was capped at 40 calls. Investigations of the SLID Blaise Transaction History (BTH) files were undertaken to assess the impact of the cap on calls.The purpose of the first study was to inform decisions as to the capping of call attempts, the second study focused on the nature of nonresponse given the limit of 40 attempts.
The use of paradata as auxiliary information for studying and accounting for survey nonresponse was also examined. Nonresponse adjustment models using different paradata variables gathered at the collection stage were compared to the current models based on available auxiliary information from the Labour Force Survey.
Release date: 2009-12-03 - Articles and reports: 11-522-X200800010999Description:
The choice of number of call attempts in a telephone survey is an important decision. A large number of call attempts makes the data collection costly and time-consuming; and a small number of attempts decreases the response set from which conclusions are drawn and increases the variance. The decision can also have an effect on the nonresponse bias. In this paper we study the effects of number of call attempts on the nonresponse rate and the nonresponse bias in two surveys conducted by Statistics Sweden: The Labour Force Survey (LFS) and Household Finances (HF).
By use of paradata we calculate the response rate as a function of the number of call attempts. To estimate the nonresponse bias we use estimates of some register variables, where observations are available for both respondents and nonrespondents. We also calculate estimates of some real survey parameters as functions of varying number of call attempts. The results indicate that it is possible to reduce the current number of call attempts without getting an increased nonresponse bias.
Release date: 2009-12-03
Data (0)
Data (0) (0 results)
No content available at this time.
Analysis (22)
Analysis (22) (0 to 10 of 22 results)
- Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900300008Description:
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 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201900200008Description:
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 - 3. Tests for evaluating nonresponse bias in surveys ArchivedArticles and reports: 12-001-X201600214677Description:
How do we tell whether weighting adjustments reduce nonresponse bias? If a variable is measured for everyone in the selected sample, then the design weights can be used to calculate an approximately unbiased estimate of the population mean or total for that variable. A second estimate of the population mean or total can be calculated using the survey respondents only, with weights that have been adjusted for nonresponse. If the two estimates disagree, then there is evidence that the weight adjustments may not have removed the nonresponse bias for that variable. In this paper we develop the theoretical properties of linearization and jackknife variance estimators for evaluating the bias of an estimated population mean or total by comparing estimates calculated from overlapping subsets of the same data with different sets of weights, when poststratification or inverse propensity weighting is used for the nonresponse adjustments to the weights. We provide sufficient conditions on the population, sample, and response mechanism for the variance estimators to be consistent, and demonstrate their small-sample properties through a simulation study.
Release date: 2016-12-20 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201500114172Description:
When a random sample drawn from a complete list frame suffers from unit nonresponse, calibration weighting to population totals can be used to remove nonresponse bias under either an assumed response (selection) or an assumed prediction (outcome) model. Calibration weighting in this way can not only provide double protection against nonresponse bias, it can also decrease variance. By employing a simple trick one can estimate the variance under the assumed prediction model and the mean squared error under the combination of an assumed response model and the probability-sampling mechanism simultaneously. Unfortunately, there is a practical limitation on what response model can be assumed when design weights are calibrated to population totals in a single step. In particular, the choice for the response function cannot always be logistic. That limitation does not hinder calibration weighting when performed in two steps: from the respondent sample to the full sample to remove the response bias and then from the full sample to the population to decrease variance. There are potential efficiency advantages from using the two-step approach as well even when the calibration variables employed in each step is a subset of the calibration variables in the single step. Simultaneous mean-squared-error estimation using linearization is possible, but more complicated than when calibrating in a single step.
Release date: 2015-06-29 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201100111443Description:
Dual frame telephone surveys are becoming common in the U.S. because of the incompleteness of the landline frame as people transition to cell phones. This article examines nonsampling errors in dual frame telephone surveys. Even though nonsampling errors are ignored in much of the dual frame literature, we find that under some conditions substantial biases may arise in dual frame telephone surveys due to these errors. We specifically explore biases due to nonresponse and measurement error in these telephone surveys. To reduce the bias resulting from these errors, we propose dual frame sampling and weighting methods. The compositing factor for combining the estimates from the two frames is shown to play an important role in reducing nonresponse bias.
Release date: 2011-06-29 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X201000211376Description:
This article develops computational tools, called indicators, for judging the effectiveness of the auxiliary information used to control nonresponse bias in survey estimates, obtained in this article by calibration. This work is motivated by the survey environment in a number of countries, notably in northern Europe, where many potential auxiliary variables are derived from reliable administrative registers for household and individuals. Many auxiliary vectors can be composed. There is a need to compare these vectors to assess their potential for reducing bias. The indicators in this article are designed to meet that need. They are used in surveys at Statistics Sweden. General survey conditions are considered: There is probability sampling from the finite population, by an arbitrary sampling design; nonresponse occurs. The probability of inclusion in the sample is known for each population unit; the probability of response is unknown, causing bias. The study variable (the y-variable) is observed for the set of respondents only. No matter what auxiliary vector is used in a calibration estimator (or in any other estimation method), a residual bias will always remain. The choice of a "best possible" auxiliary vector is guided by the indicators proposed in the article. Their background and computational features are described in the early sections of the article. Their theoretical background is explained. The concluding sections are devoted to empirical studies. One of these illustrates the selection of auxiliary variables in a survey at Statistics Sweden. A second empirical illustration is a simulation with a constructed finite population; a number of potential auxiliary vectors are ranked in order of preference with the aid of the indicators.
Release date: 2010-12-21 - Articles and reports: 12-001-X200900211038Description:
We examine overcoming the overestimation in using generalized weight share method (GWSM) caused by link nonresponse in indirect sampling. A few adjustment methods incorporating link nonresponse in using GWSM have been constructed for situations both with and without the availability of auxiliary variables. A simulation study on a longitudinal survey is presented using some of the adjustment methods we recommend. The simulation results show that these adjusted GWSMs perform well in reducing both estimation bias and variance. The advancement in bias reduction is significant.
Release date: 2009-12-23 - 8. Nonresponse bias analysis using reluctant respondents who responded after receiving monetary incentives ArchivedArticles and reports: 11-522-X200800010953Description:
As survey researchers attempt to maintain traditionally high response rates, reluctant respondents have resulted in increasing data collection costs. This respondent reluctance may be related to the amount of time it takes to complete an interview in large-scale, multi-purpose surveys, such as the National Survey of Recent College Graduates (NSRCG). Recognizing that respondent burden or questionnaire length may contribute to lower response rates, in 2003, following several months of data collection under the standard data collection protocol, the NSRCG offered its nonrespondents monetary incentives about two months before the end of the data collection,. In conjunction with the incentive offer, the NSRCG also offered persistent nonrespondents an opportunity to complete a much-abbreviated interview consisting of a few critical items. The late respondents who completed the interviews as the result of the incentive and critical items-only questionnaire offers may provide some insight into the issue of nonresponse bias and the likelihood that such interviewees would have remained survey nonrespondents if these refusal conversion efforts had not been made.
In this paper, we define "reluctant respondents" as those who responded to the survey only after extra efforts were made beyond the ones initially planned in the standard data collection protocol. Specifically, reluctant respondents in the 2003 NSRCG are those who responded to the regular or shortened questionnaire following the incentive offer. Our conjecture was that the behavior of the reluctant respondents would be more like that of nonrespondents than of respondents to the surveys. This paper describes an investigation of reluctant respondents and the extent to which they are different from regular respondents. We compare different response groups on several key survey estimates. This comparison will expand our understanding of nonresponse bias in the NSRCG, and of the characteristics of nonrespondents themselves, thus providing a basis for changes in the NSRCG weighting system or estimation procedures in the future.
Release date: 2009-12-03 - Articles and reports: 11-522-X200800010996Description:
In recent years, the use of paradata has become increasingly important to the management of collection activities at Statistics Canada. Particular attention has been paid to social surveys conducted over the phone, like the Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics (SLID). For recent SLID data collections, the number of call attempts was capped at 40 calls. Investigations of the SLID Blaise Transaction History (BTH) files were undertaken to assess the impact of the cap on calls.The purpose of the first study was to inform decisions as to the capping of call attempts, the second study focused on the nature of nonresponse given the limit of 40 attempts.
The use of paradata as auxiliary information for studying and accounting for survey nonresponse was also examined. Nonresponse adjustment models using different paradata variables gathered at the collection stage were compared to the current models based on available auxiliary information from the Labour Force Survey.
Release date: 2009-12-03 - Articles and reports: 11-522-X200800010999Description:
The choice of number of call attempts in a telephone survey is an important decision. A large number of call attempts makes the data collection costly and time-consuming; and a small number of attempts decreases the response set from which conclusions are drawn and increases the variance. The decision can also have an effect on the nonresponse bias. In this paper we study the effects of number of call attempts on the nonresponse rate and the nonresponse bias in two surveys conducted by Statistics Sweden: The Labour Force Survey (LFS) and Household Finances (HF).
By use of paradata we calculate the response rate as a function of the number of call attempts. To estimate the nonresponse bias we use estimates of some register variables, where observations are available for both respondents and nonrespondents. We also calculate estimates of some real survey parameters as functions of varying number of call attempts. The results indicate that it is possible to reduce the current number of call attempts without getting an increased nonresponse bias.
Release date: 2009-12-03
Reference (0)
Reference (0) (0 results)
No content available at this time.
- Date modified: