IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v54y2026i42.html

Click, collect, compare: Evaluating a nonprobability web survey for family demography

Author

Listed:
  • Leonie Diffené

    (Universität zu Köln)

  • Thomas Leopold

    (Universität zu Köln)

  • Zafer Buyukkececi

    (Max-Planck-Institut für Demografische Forschung)

  • Marcel Raab

    (Universität Bamberg)

Abstract

Background: High-quality population data are expensive to collect and limited in substantive scope, constraining timely and innovative research. Objective: We evaluate nonprobability data from the KINMATRIX survey by comparing it with external data on kinship structure and relationships to kin. Methods: KINMATRIX is a web-based quota survey of over 12,000 younger adults (aged 25–35) in 9 European countries and the United States. Respondents reported egocentric kinship networks, yielding more than 250,000 ego–kin dyads. We compare indicators in three domains – family network size (number of living kin), family relationships (emotional closeness, geographical distance, coresidence, and contact frequency), and family complexity (parental separation and number of half-siblings) – with estimates from probability-based surveys, demographic projections based on official vital statistics, and national registers. Results: KINMATRIX estimates of family network size tend to be lower than demographic projections based on official data, with smaller gaps for aunts and uncles and larger gaps for siblings and cousins. Cross-national differences in the number of parents, siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins are broadly consistent across data sources, whereas patterns differ for grandparents. Regarding family relationships, the correspondence between KINMATRIX and probability surveys varies across indicators, but established north–south contrasts are generally preserved. Regarding family complexity, KINMATRIX yields lower rates of parental separation than probability-based data, but it broadly captures cross-national differences. Contribution: Our comparisons point to nonprobability data having both promise and pitfalls in family demography, highlighting the need for study-specific benchmarking and targeted validation.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonie Diffené & Thomas Leopold & Zafer Buyukkececi & Marcel Raab, 2026. "Click, collect, compare: Evaluating a nonprobability web survey for family demography," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 54(42), pages 1375-1412.
  • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:54:y:2026:i:42
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2026.54.42
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol54/42/54-42.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2026.54.42?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chris Tofallis, 2015. "A better measure of relative prediction accuracy for model selection and model estimation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 66(8), pages 1352-1362, August.
    2. Ansolabehere, Stephen & Schaffner, Brian F., 2014. "Does Survey Mode Still Matter? Findings from a 2010 Multi-Mode Comparison," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 285-303, July.
    3. Hal Caswell, 2022. "The formal demography of kinship IV: Two-sex models and their approximations," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 47(13), pages 359-396.
    4. Hal Caswell, 2020. "The formal demography of kinship II: Multistate models, parity, and sibship," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 42(38), pages 1097-1146.
    5. Roger Tourangeau & J. Michael Brick & Sharon Lohr & Jane Li, 2017. "Adaptive and responsive survey designs: a review and assessment," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(1), pages 203-223, January.
    6. Paula Vicente, 2023. "Sampling Twitter users for social science research: evidence from a systematic review of the literature," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(6), pages 5449-5489, December.
    7. Balgobin Nandram & Jai Won Choi & Yang Liu, 2021. "Integration of Nonprobability and Probability Samples via Survey Weights," International Journal of Statistics and Probability, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(6), pages 1-5, December.
    8. Colasurdo, Andrea & Omenti, Riccardo, 2024. "Using Online Genealogical Data for Demographic Research: An Empirical Examination of the FamiLinx Database," SocArXiv 62yxm, Center for Open Science.
    9. Chris Tofallis, 2015. "A better measure of relative prediction accuracy for model selection and model estimation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 66(3), pages 524-524, March.
    10. Thomas Leopold & Charlotte Clara Becker & Beyda Çineli & Zafer Buyukkececi & Marcel Raab, 2024. "KINMATRIX: A new data resource for studies of families and kinship," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 51(25), pages 789-808.
    11. Andrea Colasurdo & Riccardo Omenti, 2024. "Using online genealogical data for demographic research: An empirical examination of the FamiLinx database," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 51(41), pages 1299-1350.
    12. Camilla Salvatore, 2023. "Inference with non-probability samples and survey data integration: a science mapping study," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 81(1), pages 83-107, April.
    13. repec:osf:socarx:62yxm_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Arndt, Aaron D. & Ford, John B. & Babin, Barry J. & Luong, Vinh, 2022. "Collecting samples from online services: How to use screeners to improve data quality," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 117-133.
    15. Hal Caswell, 2019. "The formal demography of kinship: A matrix formulation," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 41(24), pages 679-712.
    16. Christian Dudel & Sebastian Klüsener, 2021. "Male–Female Fertility Differentials Across 17 High-Income Countries: Insights From A New Data Resource," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 37(2), pages 417-441, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sha Jiang & Wenyun Zuo & Hal Caswell & Zhen Guo & Shripad Tuljapurkar, 2023. "How does the demographic transition affect kinship networks?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 48(32), pages 899-930.
    2. Butterick, Joe W.B. & Smith, Peter W.F. & Bijak, Jakub & Hilton, Jason, 2025. "A mathematical framework for time-variant multi-state kinship modelling," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1-12.
    3. Hal Caswell, 2024. "The formal demography of kinship VI: Demographic stochasticity and variance in the kinship network," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 51(39), pages 1201-1256.
    4. Hal Caswell & Rachel Margolis & Ashton Verdery, 2023. "The formal demography of kinship V: Kin loss, bereavement, and causes of death," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 49(41), pages 1163-1200.
    5. Joe Butterick & Jason Hilton & Peter W F Smith & Jakub Bijak & Erengul Dodd, 2026. "Probabilistic projections of distributions of kin over the life course," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 54(9), pages 263-308.
    6. Liliana P. Calderón-Bernal & Diego Alburez-Gutierrez & Emilio Zagheni, 2025. "Analysing Biases in Genealogies Using Demographic Microsimulation," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 41(1), pages 1-30, December.
    7. Omenti, Riccardo & Alexander, Monica & Barban, Nicola, 2025. "Bayesian Indirect Estimation of Historical Fertility in Europe and US Using Online Genealogical Data," OSF Preprints ygt2k_v1, Center for Open Science.
    8. Vasile Brătian & Ana-Maria Acu & Camelia Oprean-Stan & Emil Dinga & Gabriela-Mariana Ionescu, 2021. "Efficient or Fractal Market Hypothesis? A Stock Indexes Modelling Using Geometric Brownian Motion and Geometric Fractional Brownian Motion," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(22), pages 1-20, November.
    9. Rahman A. Prasojo & Karunika Diwyacitta & Suwarno & Harry Gumilang, 2017. "Transformer Paper Expected Life Estimation Using ANFIS Based on Oil Characteristics and Dissolved Gases (Case Study: Indonesian Transformers)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, August.
    10. Serrecchia, Michela, 2024. "Analysis of Internet development and internal digital divide by using the “.it” domain names as an indicator: Evidence from Italy," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    11. Díaz, Guzmán & Coto, José & Gómez-Aleixandre, Javier, 2019. "Prediction and explanation of the formation of the Spanish day-ahead electricity price through machine learning regression," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(C), pages 610-625.
    12. Kayode Ayankoya & Andre P. Calitz & Jean H. Greyling, 2016. "Real-Time Grain Commodities Price Predictions in South Africa: A Big Data and Neural Networks Approach," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(4), pages 483-508, October.
    13. Stetco, Adrian & Dinmohammadi, Fateme & Zhao, Xingyu & Robu, Valentin & Flynn, David & Barnes, Mike & Keane, John & Nenadic, Goran, 2019. "Machine learning methods for wind turbine condition monitoring: A review," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 620-635.
    14. Tuttle, Jacob F. & Blackburn, Landen D. & Andersson, Klas & Powell, Kody M., 2021. "A systematic comparison of machine learning methods for modeling of dynamic processes applied to combustion emission rate modeling," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    15. Kim, Sungil & Kim, Heeyoung, 2016. "A new metric of absolute percentage error for intermittent demand forecasts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 669-679.
    16. Rodolfo Metulini & Maurizio Carpita, 2024. "Modeling and forecasting traffic flows with mobile phone big data in flooding risk areas to support a data-driven decision making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 342(3), pages 1629-1654, November.
    17. Marijana Zekić-Sušac & Marinela Knežević & Rudolf Scitovski, 2021. "Modeling the cost of energy in public sector buildings by linear regression and deep learning," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 29(1), pages 307-322, March.
    18. Guo, Wei & Liu, Qingfu & Luo, Zhidan & Tse, Yiuman, 2022. "Forecasts for international financial series with VMD algorithms," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    19. Hal Caswell, 2022. "The formal demography of kinship IV: Two-sex models and their approximations," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 47(13), pages 359-396.
    20. Michael S. O’Donnell & Daniel J. Manier, 2022. "Spatial Estimates of Soil Moisture for Understanding Ecological Potential and Risk: A Case Study for Arid and Semi-Arid Ecosystems," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-37, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:54:y:2026:i:42. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.