The variance of some common estimators and its components under nonresponse
In most surveys, the risk of nonresponse is a factor taken into account at the planning stage. Commonly, resources are set aside for a follow-up procedure which aims at reducing the nonresponse rate. However, we should pay attention to the effect of nonresponse, rather than the nonresponse rate itself. When considering nonresponse error, i.e. bias and variance, it is not obvious that the resources spent on nonresponse rate reduction efforts are time and money well spent. In this paper we address this issue, continuing the work begun in Tångdahl (2004), now focusing on the effect of follow-ups on estimator variance. The components of the variance for some common estimators are derived under a setup that allows us to take into account the data collection process, and follow-up efforts in particular.
|Date of creation:||04 Nov 2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Örebro University School of Business, SE - 701 82 ÖREBRO, Sweden|
Phone: 019-30 30 00
Fax: 019-33 25 46
Web page: http://www.oru.se/Institutioner/Handelshogskolan-vid-Orebro-universitet/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Tångdahl, Sara, 2004. "Nonresponse bias for some common estimators and its change over time in the data collection process," Working Papers 2004:13, Örebro University, School of Business.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:oruesi:2005_009. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.