Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: st: Sample Wegihts
From
Steve Samuels <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: Sample Wegihts
Date
Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:42:05 -0500
Stas's is absolutely correct. Probability weights must be based on the
overall probability of selection. The same principle is the basis of
network sampling.
A few years ago, a telephone survey company supplied us two sets of
weights, because they had taken a second survey to bring the sample
size up. I learned that this had been standard practice for years. Not
surprisingly, their staff did not include a statistician.
The second set of weights would have been correct if they had added a
new stratum to the population and done the second survey in that
stratum only.
-Steve
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 12:47 AM, Michael Lichter <[email protected]> wrote:
Stas said:
>>overall P[ selection ] = P[ to be selected in the first sample ] + P[ to be selected in the second sample ] - P [ to be selected in both ] = 1 - (1-P[first])*(1-P[second])
Is this correct even with if the first sample is an SRS and the second
is clustered? I can't show otherwise, but it doesn't feel right that
every case in a specific urban area should have the same weight
regardless of which sample it was drawn from.
--
Steve Samuels
[email protected]
18 Cantine's Island
Saugerties NY 12477
USA
845-246-0774
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/