Advertisement

Area Sampling

  • Richard Valliant
  • Jill A. Dever
  • Frauke Kreuter
Chapter
Part of the Statistics for Social and Behavioral Sciences book series (SSBS)

Abstract

Area sampling is a catchall term for a set of procedures in which geographic areas are selected as intermediate units on the way to sampling lower-level units that are the targets of a survey. The chapter contains geographic summaries of data on population counts, demographic distributions, and other detailed estimates that are used in sample design in lieu of a population registry. We discuss composite size measures for the PSUs that are particularly useful in accomplishing the design goals for domains at the element level while keeping cost in check. Given the amount of time to develop an area frame and to select units at lower sampling stages, we discuss methods for addressing differences between the frame and what can be found in the field. Finally, the chapter also reviews a relatively new type of sampling methodology known as address-based sampling, which can reduce or eliminate the need for field-listing of households before sampling.

References

  1. AAPOR. (2016a). Address-based sampling. Tech. rep., The American Association for Public Opinion Research, Deerfield, IL, URL http://www.aapor.org/Education-Resources/Reports/Address-based-Sampling.aspx
  2. Aldworth J., Hirsch E. L., Martin P. C., Shook-Sa B. E. (2015). 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health sample design report. Tech. Rep. Prepared under contract no. HHSS283201300001C by RTI International, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, URL https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUHmrbSampleDesign2014v1.pdf
  3. Amaya A., LeClere F., Fioro L., English N. (2014). Improving the utility of the DSF address-based frame through ancillary information. Field Methods 26:70–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell B., Mohadjer L., Montaquila J. M., Rizzo L. (1999). Creating a frame of newly constructed units for household surveys. In: Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, pp 306–310.Google Scholar
  5. Brick J. M., Williams D., Montaquila J. M. (2011). Address-based sampling for subpopulation surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly 75(3):409–428, URL https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfr023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Canada S. (2017). Dictionary, census of population: Structural type of dwelling. URL http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/ref/dict/dwelling-logements013-eng.cfm, release date: 3-May-2017 [Accessed 21-Jan-2018].
  7. Dohrmann S., Kalton G., Montaquila J. M., Good C., Berlin M. (2012). Using address based sampling frames in lieu of traditional listing: A new approach. In: Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, pp 3729–3741.Google Scholar
  8. Eckman S. (2010). Errors in Housing Unit Listing and Their Effects on Survey Estimates. University of Maryland, College Park, MD, URL http://drum.lib.umd.edu//handle/1903/10302 Google Scholar
  9. Eckman S., O’Muircheartaigh C. (2011). Performance of the half–open interval missed housing unit procedure. Survey Research Methods 5(3):125–131.Google Scholar
  10. Folsom R. E., Potter F. J., Williams S. R. (1987). Notes on a composite size measure for self-weighting samples in multiple domains. In: Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, pp 792–796.Google Scholar
  11. Hansen M. H., Hurwitz W. N., Jabine T. (1963). The use of imperfect lists for probability sampling at the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Bulletin of the International Statistical Institute 40(1):497–517.Google Scholar
  12. Iannacchione V. G. (2011). Research synthesis: The changing role of address-based sampling in surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly 75(3):556–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Iannacchione V. G., Staab J. M., Redden D. T. (2003). Evaluating the use of residential mailing lists in a metropolitan household survey. Public Opinion Quarterly 67(2):202–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kalton G., Kali J., Sigman R. (2014). Handling frame problems when address-based sampling is used for in-person household surveys. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology 2:283–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kish L. (1965). Survey Sampling. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Lepanjuuri K., Cornick P., Byron C., Templeton I., Hurn J. (2017). National Travel Survey 2016: Technical Report. Tech. rep., NatCen, Great Britain, URL https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/632910/nts-technical-report-2016.pdf
  17. Montaquila J. M., Bell B., Mohadjer L., Rizzo L. (1999). A methodology for sampling households late in a decade. In: Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, pp 311–315.Google Scholar
  18. Roth S., Han D., Montaquila J. M. (2012). The abs frame: Quality and considerations. Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods.Google Scholar
  19. Roth S., Han D., Montaquila J. M. (2013). The abs frame: Quality and considerations. Survey Practice 6:3779–3793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shook-Sa B. E., Currivan D. B., McMichael J. P., Iannacchione V. G. (2013). Extending the coverage of address-based sampling frames: Beyond the USPS computerized delivery sequence file. Public Opinion Quarterly 77(4):994–1005, URL https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nft041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shook-Sa B. E., Harter R., McMichael J. P., Ridenhour J. L., Dever J. A. (2016). The CHUM: A Frame Supplementation Procedure for Address-Based Sampling. RTI Press, pp 1–18, https://www.rti.org/publication/chum-frame-supplementation-procedure-address-based-sampling
  22. Stephan F. (1936). Practical problems of sampling procedure. American Sociological Review 1:569–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. US Census Bureau. (1991). The 1990 Census of Population and Housing. Population and Housing Counts: 1790–1990.Google Scholar
  24. US Census Bureau. (2001a). Housing Characteristics: 2000. Census 2000 Brief. URL https://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-13.pdf
  25. US Census Bureau. (2001b). Population Change and Distribution 1990–2000. Census 2000 Brief. URL http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/briefs.html
  26. US Census Bureau. (2006). Current Population Survey: Design and Methodology. URL http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/tp-66.pdf
  27. US Census Bureau. (2010). Metropolitan and Micropolitan: 2010 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Standards. URL https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/metro-micro/about/omb-standards.html
  28. US Census Bureau. (2011). 2010 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File. URL http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/pl94-171.pdf
  29. US Census Bureau. (2017a). Geography: Maps and data. URL https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/
  30. US Census Bureau. (2017b). Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) Program. URL https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/saipe.html
  31. Valliant R., Hubbard F., Lee S., Chang W. (2014). Efficient use of commercial lists in U.S. household sampling. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology 2:182–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Victor R. G., Haley R. W., Willett D. L., Peshock R. M., Vaeth P. C., Leonard D., Basit M., Cooper R. S., Iannacchione V. G., Visscher W. A., Staab J. M., Hobbs H. H., Dallas Heart Study Investigators. (2004). The Dallas Heart Study: A population-based probability sample for the multidisciplinary study of ethnic differences in cardiovascular health. American Journal of Cardiology 93(12):1473–1480, URL http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15194016
  33. Waksberg J., Judkins D., Massey J. T. (1997). Geographic-based oversampling in demographic surveys of the united states. Survey Methodology 23:61–71.Google Scholar
  34. Wright J., Marsden P. (2010). Handbook of Survey Research, 2nd edn. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK.Google Scholar
  35. Yates F. (1953). Sampling Methods for Censuses and Surveys. Charles Griffin, London.zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Valliant
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jill A. Dever
    • 3
  • Frauke Kreuter
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.University of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  3. 3.RTI InternationalWashington, DCUSA
  4. 4.University of MannheimMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations