An algorithm based on discrete response regression models suitable to correct the bias of non-response in surveys with several capture tries

dc.contributor.authorAnido, Carmen
dc.contributor.authorRivero Rodríguez, Carlos
dc.contributor.authorValdés Sánchez, Teófilo
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-20T10:33:20Z
dc.date.available2023-06-20T10:33:20Z
dc.date.issued2005-04-16
dc.description.abstractThe use of survey plans, which contemplate several tries or call-backs when endeavouring to capture individual data, may supply unarguable information in certain sampling situations with non-ignorable non-response. This paper presents an algorithm whose final aim is the estimation of the individual non-response probabilities from a general perspective of discrete response regression models, which includes the well known probit and logit models. It will be assumed that the respondents supply all the variables of interest when they are captured. Nevertheless, the call-backs continue. even after previous captures, for a small number of tries, r, which has been fixed beforehand only for estimating purposes. The different retries or call-backs are supposed to be carried out with different capture intensities. As mentioned above. the response probabilities, which may vary from one individual to another, are sought by discrete response regression models, whose parameters are estimated from conditioned likelihoods evaluated on the respondents only. The algorithm, quick and easy to implement, may be used even when the capture indicator matrix has been partially recorded. Finally, the practical performance of the proposed procedure is tested and evaluated from empirical simulations whose results are undoubtedly encouraging.
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Estadística e Investigación Operativa
dc.description.facultyFac. de Ciencias Matemáticas
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.sponsorshipMEC
dc.description.sponsorshipEUROSTAT
dc.description.statuspub
dc.eprint.idhttps://eprints.ucm.es/id/eprint/20203
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ejor.2003.06.031
dc.identifier.issn0377-2217
dc.identifier.officialurlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221703006258
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/50490
dc.issue.number2
dc.journal.titleEuropean journal of operational research
dc.language.isoeng
dc.page.final402
dc.page.initial387
dc.publisherElsevier Science
dc.relation.projectIDSEC99-0402
dc.relation.projectID9.242.010
dc.rights.accessRightsrestricted access
dc.subject.cdu519.2
dc.subject.keywordmultivariate statistics
dc.subject.keywordestimation algorithms
dc.subject.keyworddiscrete response models
dc.subject.keywordnon-ignorable non-response
dc.subject.keywordconditional likelihood
dc.subject.ucmEstadística matemática (Matemáticas)
dc.subject.unesco1209 Estadística
dc.titleAn algorithm based on discrete response regression models suitable to correct the bias of non-response in surveys with several capture tries
dc.typejournal article
dc.volume.number162
dcterms.referencesAlho, J., 1990. Logistic regression in capture–recapture models. Biometrika 46, 623–635. Crawford, J.W., Gallwey, T.J., 2000. Bias and variance reduction in computer simulation studies. European Journal of Operational Research 124 (3), 571–590. Drew, J.H., Fuller, W.A., 1980. Modelling non-response in surveys with call-backs. Proceedings of Survey Research Methodology Section, American Statistical Association 48, 743–772. Fahrmeir, L., Kauffmann, H., 1985. Consistency and asymptotic normality of the maximum likelihood estimator in generalized linear models. Annals of Statistics 13, 342–368. Glynn, R., Laird, N., Rubin, D.B., 1986. Selection modelling versus mixture modelling with non-ignorable non-response. In: Proceedings of the 1985 Educational Testing Service Conference on Selection Modelling. Huggins, R.M., 1989. On the statistical analysis in capture experiments. Biometrika 76, 133–140. Lange, K., 1995. A gradient algorithm locally equivalent to the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 57 (2), 425–437 Little, R., Rubin, D.B., 1987. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. John Wiley, New York. Madow, W.G., Olkin, H., Nisselson, H., Rubin, D.B. (Eds.), 1983. Incomplete Data in Sample Surveys, Three Volumes. Academic Press, New York. Osborne, M.R., 1992. Fisher s method of scoring. International Statistical Review 60, 99–117. Politz, A., Simmons, W., 1949. An attempt to get ‘‘not at homes’’ into the sample without call-backs. Journal of the American Statistical Association 44, 9–31. Sanathanan, L., 1972. Estimating the size of a multinomial population. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 43, 142–152. S€arndal, C.E., 1980. On p-inverse weighting versus best linear unbiased weighting in probability sampling. Biometrika 67, 639–650. Schafer, D.W., 1993. Likelihood analysis for probit regression with measurements errors. Biometrika 80, 899–904. Tong, Y.L., 1990. The Multivariate Normal Distribution. Springer Verlag, New York.
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication57155156-5c76-4da2-9777-5ab79884445c
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery57155156-5c76-4da2-9777-5ab79884445c

Download

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Teofilo08elsevier.pdf
Size:
347.19 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections