IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joupea/v45y2008i5p653-663.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bias in Epidemiological Studies of Conflict Mortality

Author

Listed:
  • Neil F. Johnson

    (Department of Physics, University of Miami)

  • Michael Spagat

    (Department of Economics, Royal Holloway College, University of London, m.spagat@rhul.ac.uk)

  • Sean Gourley

    (Department of Physics and Said Business School, University of Oxford)

  • Jukka-Pekka Onnela

    (Department of Physics and Said Business School, University of Oxford, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Computational Science, Helsinki University of Technology)

  • Gesine Reinert

    (Department of Statistics, Oxford University)

Abstract

Cluster sampling has recently been used to estimate the mortality in various conflicts around the world. The Burnham et al. study on Iraq employs a new variant of this cluster sampling methodology. The stated methodology of Burnham et al. is to (1) select a random main street, (2) choose a random cross street to this main street, and (3) select a random household on the cross street to start the process. The authors show that this new variant of the cluster sampling methodology can introduce an unexpected, yet substantial, bias into the resulting estimates, as such streets are a natural habitat for patrols, convoys, police stations, road-blocks, cafes, and street-markets. This bias comes about because the residents of households on cross-streets to the main streets are more likely to be exposed to violence than those living further away. Here, the authors develop a mathematical model to gauge the size of the bias and use the existing evidence to propose values for the parameters that underlie the model. The research suggests that the Burnham et al. study of conflict mortality in Iraq may represent a substantial overestimate of mortality. Indeed, the recently published Iraq Family Health Survey covered virtually the same time period as the Burnham et al. study, used census-based sampling techniques, and produced a central estimate for violent deaths that was one fourth of the Burnham et al. estimate. The authors provide a sensitivity analysis to help readers to tune their own judgements on the extent of this bias by varying the parameter values. Future progress on this subject would benefit from the release of high-resolution data by the authors of the Burnham et al. study.

Suggested Citation

  • Neil F. Johnson & Michael Spagat & Sean Gourley & Jukka-Pekka Onnela & Gesine Reinert, 2008. "Bias in Epidemiological Studies of Conflict Mortality," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 45(5), pages 653-663, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:45:y:2008:i:5:p:653-663
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/45/5/653.abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Spagat & Andrew Mack & Tara Cooper & Joakim Kreutz, 2009. "Estimating War Deaths," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(6), pages 934-950, December.
    2. Michael Spagat, 2010. "Estimating the Human Costs of War: The Sample Survey Approach," HiCN Research Design Notes 14, Households in Conflict Network.

    More about this item

    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:sae:joupea:v:45:y:2008:i:5:p:653-663. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.prio.no/ .

    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.