{"title":"验证非概率样本中比例的选择偏差指数","authors":"Angelina Hammon, Sabine Zinn","doi":"10.1111/insr.12590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"SummaryFast online surveys without sampling frames are becoming increasingly important in survey research. Their recruitment methods result in non‐probability samples. As the mechanism of data generation is always unknown in such samples, the problem of non‐ignorability arises making vgeneralisation of calculated statistics to the population of interest highly questionable. Sensitivity analyses provide a valuable tool to deal with non‐ignorability. They capture the impact of different sample selection mechanisms on target statistics. In 2019, Andridge and colleagues proposed an index to quantify potential (non‐ignorable) selection bias in proportions that combines the effects of different selection mechanisms. In this paper, we validate this index with an artificial non‐probability sample generated from a large empirical data set and additionally applied it to proportions estimated from data on current political attitudes arising from a real non‐probability sample selected via River sampling. We find a number of conditions that must be met for the index to perform meaningfully. When these requirements are fulfilled, the index shows an overall good performance in both of our applications in detecting and correcting present selection bias in estimated proportions. Thus, it provides a powerful measure for evaluating the robustness of results obtained from non‐probability samples.","PeriodicalId":14479,"journal":{"name":"International Statistical Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validating an Index of Selection Bias for Proportions in Non‐Probability Samples\",\"authors\":\"Angelina Hammon, Sabine Zinn\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/insr.12590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"SummaryFast online surveys without sampling frames are becoming increasingly important in survey research. Their recruitment methods result in non‐probability samples. As the mechanism of data generation is always unknown in such samples, the problem of non‐ignorability arises making vgeneralisation of calculated statistics to the population of interest highly questionable. Sensitivity analyses provide a valuable tool to deal with non‐ignorability. They capture the impact of different sample selection mechanisms on target statistics. In 2019, Andridge and colleagues proposed an index to quantify potential (non‐ignorable) selection bias in proportions that combines the effects of different selection mechanisms. In this paper, we validate this index with an artificial non‐probability sample generated from a large empirical data set and additionally applied it to proportions estimated from data on current political attitudes arising from a real non‐probability sample selected via River sampling. We find a number of conditions that must be met for the index to perform meaningfully. When these requirements are fulfilled, the index shows an overall good performance in both of our applications in detecting and correcting present selection bias in estimated proportions. Thus, it provides a powerful measure for evaluating the robustness of results obtained from non‐probability samples.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14479,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Statistical Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Statistical Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/insr.12590\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"数学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"STATISTICS & PROBABILITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Statistical Review","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/insr.12590","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"STATISTICS & PROBABILITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Validating an Index of Selection Bias for Proportions in Non‐Probability Samples
SummaryFast online surveys without sampling frames are becoming increasingly important in survey research. Their recruitment methods result in non‐probability samples. As the mechanism of data generation is always unknown in such samples, the problem of non‐ignorability arises making vgeneralisation of calculated statistics to the population of interest highly questionable. Sensitivity analyses provide a valuable tool to deal with non‐ignorability. They capture the impact of different sample selection mechanisms on target statistics. In 2019, Andridge and colleagues proposed an index to quantify potential (non‐ignorable) selection bias in proportions that combines the effects of different selection mechanisms. In this paper, we validate this index with an artificial non‐probability sample generated from a large empirical data set and additionally applied it to proportions estimated from data on current political attitudes arising from a real non‐probability sample selected via River sampling. We find a number of conditions that must be met for the index to perform meaningfully. When these requirements are fulfilled, the index shows an overall good performance in both of our applications in detecting and correcting present selection bias in estimated proportions. Thus, it provides a powerful measure for evaluating the robustness of results obtained from non‐probability samples.
期刊介绍:
International Statistical Review is the flagship journal of the International Statistical Institute (ISI) and of its family of Associations. It publishes papers of broad and general interest in statistics and probability. The term Review is to be interpreted broadly. The types of papers that are suitable for publication include (but are not limited to) the following: reviews/surveys of significant developments in theory, methodology, statistical computing and graphics, statistical education, and application areas; tutorials on important topics; expository papers on emerging areas of research or application; papers describing new developments and/or challenges in relevant areas; papers addressing foundational issues; papers on the history of statistics and probability; white papers on topics of importance to the profession or society; and historical assessment of seminal papers in the field and their impact.