scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Household Surveys with Multiplicity

01 Mar 1970-Journal of the American Statistical Association (Taylor & Francis Group)-Vol. 65, Iss: 329, pp 257-266
TL;DR: In the household survey with multiplicity, sample households report information about their own residents as well as about other persons who live elsewhere, such as relatives or neighbors, as specified by a multiplicity rule adopted in the survey as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: In the household survey with multiplicity, sample households report information about their own residents as well as about other persons who live elsewhere, such as relatives or neighbors, as specified by a multiplicity rule adopted in the survey. Although sampling errors for the multiplicity survey are not necessarily smaller than those for the conventional survey in which sample households report for their own residents only, in most instances it should be feasible to assure a substantial reduction in sampling error by selecting appropriate multiplicity rules. Using alternative statistical models, it is demonstrated that under specified conditions, sampling errors for the multiplicity survey are necessarily smaller than those for the conventional survey, and the results give insight regarding the factors contributing to the efficiency of the multiplicity survey.
Citations
More filters
Reference EntryDOI
15 Aug 2006
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present two different approaches to snowball sampling: the first is to ask a person to inform potential subjects about the research project and share the investigator's contact information, and then it is up to the potential subjects to contact the investigator.
Abstract: Snowball sampling is a recruitment method in which an investigator enlists the help of a research subject in identifying, and possibly recruiting, additional subjects. It is useful when the investigator may not have access to a population of potential subjects who meet inclusion criteria, which may often be stigmatizing. There are two different approaches to snowball recruitment. In the first method, the investigator asks a person to inform potential subjects about the research project and share the investigator's contact information. It is then up to the potential subjects to contact the investigator. The informed consent process should make it clear that agreeing to contact others is not a requisite for participating in the research. Also, the researcher should not offer a reward or a " bounty " for recruiting subjects. This method rarely presents ethical issues for the IRB. The second method is more common but problematic. The investigator asks the first recruited subject for contact information about potential subjects and then contacts them directly. The major ethical issue is that the first subject may be divulging information about other people that they would prefer to be kept confidential. And it is especially problematic when the referring individual is a person of authority in the community. The IRB would evaluate very carefully the context in which this approach to recruitment is occurring. The Boise State University IRB has a good discussion of snowball sampling. For additional discussion, see he discussion on the NSF site.

2,795 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The article reviews the research done by survey methodologists on reporting errors in surveys on sensitive topics, noting parallels and differences from the psychological literature on social desirability.
Abstract: Psychologists have worried about the distortions introduced into standardized personality measures by social desirability bias. Survey researchers have had similar concerns about the accuracy of survey reports about such topics as illicit drug use, abortion, and sexual behavior. The article reviews the research done by survey methodologists on reporting errors in surveys on sensitive topics, noting parallels and differences from the psychological literature on social desirability. The findings from the survey studies suggest that misreporting about sensitive topics is quite common and that it is largely situational. The extent of misreporting depends on whether the respondent has anything embarrassing to report and on design features of the survey. The survey evidence also indicates that misreporting on sensitive topics is a more or less motivated process in which respondents edit the information they report to avoid embarrassing themselves in the presence of an interviewer or to avoid repercussions from third parties.

2,318 citations


Cites methods from "Household Surveys with Multiplicity..."

  • ...An estimate of the prevalence of heroin use is derived via standard multiplicity procedures (e.g., Sirken, 1970)....

    [...]

Book
15 Dec 1999
TL;DR: Lohr's SAMPLING: DESIGN and ANALYSIS, 2ND EDITION as mentioned in this paper provides guidance on how to tell when a sample is valid or not, and how to design and analyze many different forms of sample surveys.
Abstract: For a current, practical introduction to the field of sampling that you'll want to keep close at hand, Sharon L. Lohr's SAMPLING: DESIGN AND ANALYSIS, 2ND EDITION, answers the call. Practical and authoritative, the book is listed as a standard reference for training on real-world survey problems by a number of prominent surveying organizations. Lohr concentrates on the statistical aspects of taking and analyzing a sample, incorporating a multitude of applications from a variety of disciplines. The text gives guidance on how to tell when a sample is valid or not, and how to design and analyze many different forms of sample surveys. Recent research on theoretical and applied aspects of sampling is included, as well as technology instructions for using statistical software with survey data.

2,104 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper develops a sampling and estimation technique called respondent-driven sampling, which allows researchers to make asymptotically unbiased estimates about the characteristics of hidden populations such as injection drug users, the homeless, and artists.
Abstract: Standard statistical methods often provide no way to make accurate estimates about the characteristics of hidden populations such as injection drug users, the homeless, and artists. In this paper, we further develop a sampling and estimation technique called respondent-driven sampling, which allows researchers to make asymptotically unbiased estimates about these hidden populations. The sample is selected with a snowball-type design that can be done more cheaply, quickly, and easily than other methods currently in use. Further, we can show that under certain specified (and quite general) conditions, our estimates for the percentage of the population with a specific trait are asymptotically unbiased. We further show that these estimates are asymptotically unbiased no matter how the seeds are selected. We conclude with a comparison of respondent-driven samples of jazz musicians in New York and San Francisco, with corresponding institutional samples of jazz musicians from these cities. The results show that ...

1,744 citations


Cites background from "Household Surveys with Multiplicity..."

  • ...1998a, b), multiplicity sampling (Sirken 1970), and capture-recapture (Sudman, Sirken, and Cowan 1988; Hogan 1993; Heckathorn et al....

    [...]

  • ...…(Frank 1979; Frank and Snijders 1994; Dávid and Snijders 2002), network scale-up designs (Killworth et al. 1998a, b), multiplicity sampling (Sirken 1970), and capture-recapture (Sudman, Sirken, and Cowan 1988; Hogan 1993; Heckathorn et al. 2002; Heckathorn and Jeffri 2003). to 6 PM at a…...

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
Ivar Krumpal1
TL;DR: This article reviewed theoretical explanations of socially motivated misreporting in sensitive surveys and provided an overview of the empirical evidence on the effectiveness of specific survey methods designed to encourage the respondents to answer more honestly.
Abstract: Survey questions asking about taboo topics such as sexual activities, illegal behaviour such as social fraud, or unsocial attitudes such as racism, often generate inaccurate survey estimates which are distorted by social desirability bias. Due to self-presentation concerns, survey respondents underreport socially undesirable activities and overreport socially desirable ones. This article reviews theoretical explanations of socially motivated misreporting in sensitive surveys and provides an overview of the empirical evidence on the effectiveness of specific survey methods designed to encourage the respondents to answer more honestly. Besides psychological aspects, like a stable need for social approval and the preference for not getting involved into embarrassing social interactions, aspects of the survey design, the interviewer’s characteristics and the survey situation determine the occurrence and the degree of social desirability bias. The review shows that survey designers could generate more valid data by selecting appropriate data collection strategies that reduce respondents’ discomfort when answering to a sensitive question.

1,703 citations

References
More filters
01 Oct 1965

59 citations


"Household Surveys with Multiplicity..." refers background in this paper

  • ...It is noteworthy that N1', unlike other estimators for multiplicity surveys that have been investigated [1], does not require matching individuals reported by different households to eliminate duplicate reports....

    [...]

  • ...REFERENCE [1] Birnbaum, Z....

    [...]