IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/39120.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Linearization variance estimation for generalized raking estimators in the presence of nonresponse

Author

Listed:
  • D'Arrigo, Julia
  • Skinner, Chris J.

Abstract

Alternative forms of linearization variance estimators for generalized raking estimators are defined via different choices of the weights applied (a) to residuals and (b) to the estimated regression coefficients used in calculating the residuals. Some theory is presented for three forms of generalized raking estimator, the classical raking ratio estimator, the 'maximum likelihood' raking estimator and the generalized regression estimator, and for associated linearization variance estimators. A simulation study is undertaken, based upon a labour force survey and an income and expenditure survey. Properties of the estimators are assessed with respect to both sampling and nonresponse. The study displays little difference between the properties of the alternative raking estimators for a given sampling scheme and nonresponse model. Amongst the variance estimators, the approach which weights residuals by the design weight can be severely biased in the presence of nonresponse. The approach which weights residuals by the calibrated weight tends to display much less bias. Varying the choice of the weights used to construct the regression coefficients has little impact.

Suggested Citation

  • D'Arrigo, Julia & Skinner, Chris J., 2010. "Linearization variance estimation for generalized raking estimators in the presence of nonresponse," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 39120, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:39120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/39120/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ted Chang & Phillip S. Kott, 2008. "Using calibration weighting to adjust for nonresponse under a plausible model," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 95(3), pages 555-571.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kott Phillip S., 2013. "Discussion," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 29(3), pages 359-362, June.
    2. Williams Matthew & Berg Emily, 2013. "Incorporating User Input Into Optimal Constraining Procedures for Survey Estimates," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 29(3), pages 375-396, June.
    3. Kyle Vincent, 2015. "2013 Methods-of-Payment Survey: Sample Calibration Analysis," Technical Reports 103, Bank of Canada.
    4. Anne Konrad & Jan Pablo Burgard & Ralf Münnich, 2021. "A Two‐level GREG Estimator for Consistent Estimation in Household Surveys," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 89(3), pages 635-656, December.

    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. Carl-Erik Särndal & Imbi Traat & Kaur Lumiste, 2018. "Interaction Between Data Collection And Estimation Phases In Surveys With Nonresponse," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 19(2), pages 183-200, June.
    2. Christopher L. Foote & Tyler Hounshell & William D. Nordhaus & Douglas Rivers & Pamela Torola, 2021. "Measuring the US Employment Situation Using Online Panels: The Yale Labor Survey," Current Policy Perspectives 93422, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    3. Maciej Berȩsewicz & Dagmara Nikulin, 2021. "Estimation of the size of informal employment based on administrative records with non‐ignorable selection mechanism," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 70(3), pages 667-690, June.
    4. Denis Devaud & Yves Tillé, 2019. "Deville and Särndal’s calibration: revisiting a 25-years-old successful optimization problem," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 28(4), pages 1033-1065, December.
    5. Jiang, Depeng & Zhao, Puying & Tang, Niansheng, 2016. "A propensity score adjustment method for regression models with nonignorable missing covariates," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 98-119.
    6. Kajal Dihidar, 2014. "Estimating population mean with missing data in unequal probability sampling," Statistics in Transition new series, Główny Urząd Statystyczny (Polska), vol. 15(3), pages 369-388, June.
    7. Alexandra Filindra & Melanie Kolbe, 2022. "Latinx identification with whiteness: What drives it, and what effects does it have on political preferences?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(6), pages 1424-1439, November.
    8. Kott Phillip S. & Liao Dan, 2018. "Calibration Weighting for Nonresponse with Proxy Frame Variables (So that Unit Nonresponse Can Be Not Missing at Random)," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 34(1), pages 107-120, March.
    9. Li, Mengyan & Ma, Yanyuan & Zhao, Jiwei, 2022. "Efficient estimation in a partially specified nonignorable propensity score model," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    10. Xiaojun Mao & Zhonglei Wang & Shu Yang, 2023. "Matrix completion under complex survey sampling," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 75(3), pages 463-492, June.
    11. M. Giovanna Ranalli & Alina Matei & Andrea Neri, 2023. "Generalised calibration with latent variables for the treatment of unit nonresponse in sample surveys," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 32(1), pages 169-195, March.
    12. Chipperfield James & Brown James & Bell Philip, 2017. "Estimating the Count Error in the Australian Census," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(1), pages 43-59, March.
    13. Gonzalez Jeffrey M. & Eltinge John L., 2016. "Discussion," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 32(2), pages 295-300, June.
    14. Christopher Henry & Kim Huynh & Gradon Nicholls & Mitchell Nicholson, 2019. "2018 Bitcoin Omnibus Survey: Awareness and Usage," Discussion Papers 2019-10, Bank of Canada.
    15. Särndal Carl-Erik & Traat Imbi & Lumiste Kaur, 2018. "Interaction Between Data Collection And Estimation Phases In Surveys With Nonresponse," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 19(2), pages 183-200, June.
    16. Christopher Foote & William D. Nordhaus & Douglas Rivers, 2020. "The US Employment Situation Using the Yale Labor Survey," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2243, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    17. Bo Xiong & Sixia Chen, 2014. "Estimating gravity equation models in the presence of sample selection and heteroscedasticity," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(24), pages 2993-3003, August.
    18. Brick J. Michael, 2013. "Unit Nonresponse and Weighting Adjustments: A Critical Review," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 29(3), pages 329-353, June.
    19. Puying Zhao & Hui Zhao & Niansheng Tang & Zhaohai Li, 2017. "Weighted composite quantile regression analysis for nonignorable missing data using nonresponse instrument," Journal of Nonparametric Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 189-212, April.
    20. Hamori, Shigeyuki & Motegi, Kaiji & Zhang, Zheng, 2019. "Calibration estimation of semiparametric copula models with data missing at random," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 85-109.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    calibration; nonresponse; raking; variance estimation; weight;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: 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:ehl:lserod:39120. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.