Sensitivity Analysis for Survey Weights

IF 4.7 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Analysis Pub Date : 2022-06-14 DOI:10.1017/pan.2023.12
E. Hartman, Melody Y. Huang
{"title":"Sensitivity Analysis for Survey Weights","authors":"E. Hartman, Melody Y. Huang","doi":"10.1017/pan.2023.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Survey weighting allows researchers to account for bias in survey samples, due to unit nonresponse or convenience sampling, using measured demographic covariates. Unfortunately, in practice, it is impossible to know whether the estimated survey weights are sufficient to alleviate concerns about bias due to unobserved confounders or incorrect functional forms used in weighting. In the following paper, we propose two sensitivity analyses for the exclusion of important covariates: (1) a sensitivity analysis for partially observed confounders (i.e., variables measured across the survey sample, but not the target population) and (2) a sensitivity analysis for fully unobserved confounders (i.e., variables not measured in either the survey or the target population). We provide graphical and numerical summaries of the potential bias that arises from such confounders, and introduce a benchmarking approach that allows researchers to quantitatively reason about the sensitivity of their results. We demonstrate our proposed sensitivity analyses using state-level 2020 U.S. Presidential Election polls.","PeriodicalId":48270,"journal":{"name":"Political Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2023.12","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Survey weighting allows researchers to account for bias in survey samples, due to unit nonresponse or convenience sampling, using measured demographic covariates. Unfortunately, in practice, it is impossible to know whether the estimated survey weights are sufficient to alleviate concerns about bias due to unobserved confounders or incorrect functional forms used in weighting. In the following paper, we propose two sensitivity analyses for the exclusion of important covariates: (1) a sensitivity analysis for partially observed confounders (i.e., variables measured across the survey sample, but not the target population) and (2) a sensitivity analysis for fully unobserved confounders (i.e., variables not measured in either the survey or the target population). We provide graphical and numerical summaries of the potential bias that arises from such confounders, and introduce a benchmarking approach that allows researchers to quantitatively reason about the sensitivity of their results. We demonstrate our proposed sensitivity analyses using state-level 2020 U.S. Presidential Election polls.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测量权重的灵敏度分析
调查加权允许研究人员使用测量的人口统计协变量来解释调查样本中由于单位无反应或方便抽样而产生的偏差。不幸的是,在实践中,不可能知道估计的调查权重是否足以缓解由于未观察到的混杂因素或加权中使用的不正确的函数形式而引起的对偏差的担忧。在以下论文中,我们提出了两种排除重要协变量的敏感性分析:(1)对部分观察到的混杂因素(即在调查样本中测量的变量,但不是目标人群)的敏感性分析;(2)对完全未观察到的混混杂因素(即调查或目标人群中未测量的变量)的灵敏度分析。我们提供了由这些混杂因素引起的潜在偏差的图形和数字摘要,并引入了一种基准方法,使研究人员能够定量地推断其结果的敏感性。我们使用州级2020年美国总统选举民调来展示我们提出的敏感性分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Political Analysis
Political Analysis POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
3.70%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Political Analysis chronicles these exciting developments by publishing the most sophisticated scholarship in the field. It is the place to learn new methods, to find some of the best empirical scholarship, and to publish your best research.
期刊最新文献
Synthetic Replacements for Human Survey Data? The Perils of Large Language Models NonRandom Tweet Mortality and Data Access Restrictions: Compromising the Replication of Sensitive Twitter Studies Generalizing toward Nonrespondents: Effect Estimates in Survey Experiments Are Broadly Similar for Eager and Reluctant Participants Estimators for Topic-Sampling Designs Flexible Estimation of Policy Preferences for Witnesses in Committee Hearings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1