Testing for measurement error in survey data analysis using paradata
利用调查过程数据检验测量误差偏差AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究调查测量误差检验与复杂抽样;使用住户面板调查数据并未说明采用面板计量方法,因此不据数据名分类。
利用调查过程数据检验测量误差偏差AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Summary Paradata refers to survey variables which are not of direct interest themselves, but are related to the quality of data on survey variables which are of interest. We focus on a categorical paradata variable, which reflects the presence of measurement error in a variable of interest. We propose a quasi-score test of the hypothesis of no measurement error bias in the estimation of regression coefficients under models for paradata. We also propose a regression-based test, analogous to a simple test proposed by Fuller for instrumental variables. The methods developed can take account of a complex sampling design. In an application with data from the British Household Panel Survey, all tests provide clear evidence of measurement bias in the estimated coefficient of gross pay. In a simulation study, all tests have rejection rates close to the nominal level under the null hypothesis; the quasi-score tests display more power than the regression-based test. The size of the quasi-score test is shown to be robust to some forms of misspecification of the paradata model, both by a theoretical argument and in findings of the simulation study.