Advertisement

Test

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 233–253 | Cite as

An iterative estimating procedure for probit-type nonresponse models in surveys with call backs

  • Carmen Anido
  • Teófilo Valdés
Article

Abstract

This work attempts to treat the negatives to respond in sample plans when several tries or call backs in the capture of individual data are assumed. We also maintain the assumption that the respondents supply all the variables of interest when they are captured although the retries are kept on, even after previous captures, for a predetermined number of tries,r, fixed only for estimating purposes. Supposing that the different retries or call backs are exerted with different capture intensities, the response probabilities, which may vary from one individual to another, are searched by probit models whose parameters are estimated using conditional likelihoods evaluated on the respondents only (other models, derived from error distributions different from normal, could also be possible by approximating numerical techniques quite similar to the ones proposed here). We present a numerical estimating algorithm, quite easy to implement, which may be used when the recorded information about data captures includes at least marginal results. Finally, we include some encouraging empirical simulations whose purpose is centred in testing and evaluating the practical performance of the procedure.

Key Words

Conditioned likelihood iterative estimation missing data non ignorability non response probit models 

AMS subject classification

62A10 62E20 62F12 62F30 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alho, J. (1990). Logistic regression in capture-recapture models.Biometrics,46, 623–635.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Drew, J.H. and W.A. Fuller (1980). Modeling nonresponse in surveys with call backs. InProceedings of the Survey Response Methods Section, American Statistical Association,48, 639–642.Google Scholar
  3. Fahrmeir, L. and H. Kauffmann (1985). Consistency and asymptotic normality of the maximum likelihood estimator in generalized linear models.Annals of Statistics,13, 342–368.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Glynn, R., N. Laird and D.B. Rubin (1986). Selection modelling versus mixture modelling with nonignorable nonresponse. InProceedings of the 1985 Educational Testing Service Conference on Selection Modelling.Google Scholar
  5. Huggins, R.M. (1989). On the statistical analysis of capture experiments.Biometrika,76, 133–140.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Lange, K. (1995). A gradient algorithm locally equivalent to the EM algorithm.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, B,57, 425–437.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Little, R. and D.B. Rubin (1987).Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. John Wiley, New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Madow, W.G., H. Nisselson and I. Olkin (1983).Incomplete Data in Sample Surveys, Report and Case Studies Vol. I, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Madow, W.G. and I. Olkin (1983).Incomplete Data in Sample Surveys, Proceedings of the Symposium, Vol. III. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Madow, W.G., I. Olkin and D.B. Rubin (1983).Incomplete data in sample surveys, Theory and Bibliographies Vol. II. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Osborne, M.R. (1992). Fisher's method of scoring.International Statistical Review,60, 99–117.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Politz, A. and W. Simmons (1949). An attempt to get “not at homes” into the sample without call backs.Journal of the American Statistical Association,44, 9–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sanathanan, L. (1972). Estimating the size of a multinomial population.Annals of Mathematical Statistics,43, 142–152.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Särndal, C.E. (1980). On π-inverse weighting versus best linear unbiased weighting in probability sampling.Biometrika,67, 639–650.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Schafer, D.W. (1993). Likelihood analysis for probit regression with measurements errors.Biometrika,80, 899–904.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tong, Y.L. (1990).The Multivariate Normal Distribution. Springer Verlag, New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Sociedad Española de Estadistica e Investigación Operativa 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carmen Anido
    • 2
  • Teófilo Valdés
    • 1
  1. 1.Departmento de Estadística e Investigación OperativaUniversidad Complutense de MadridSpain
  2. 2.Department de Análisis Económico: Economía CuantitativaUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations