A Split Questionnaire Survey Design
分拆问卷调查设计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:摘要重点是调查设计与多重插补,Logistic 回归仅用于模拟评价,未支持所列离散选择等细分分类。
反馈分类问题分拆问卷调查设计AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
This article develops a survey design where the questionnaire is split into components and individuals are administered the varying subsets of the components. A multiple imputation method for analyzing data from this design is developed, in which the imputations are created by random draws from the posterior predictive distribution of the missing parts, given the observed parts by using Gibbs sampling under a general location scale model. Results from two simulation studies that investigate the properties of the inferences using this design are reported. In the first study several random split questionnaire designs are imposed on the complete data from an existing survey collected using a long questionnaire, and the corresponding data elements are extracted to form split data sets. Inferences obtained using the complete data and the split data are then compared. This comparison suggests that little is lost, at least in the example considered, by administering only parts of the questionnaire to each sampled individual. The second simulation study reports on the investigation of the efficiency of the split questionnaire design and the robustness of the estimates to the distributional assumptions used to create imputations. In this study several complete and split data sets were generated under a variety of distributional assumptions, and the imputations for the split data sets were created assuming the normality of the distributions. The sampling properties of the point and interval estimates of the regression coefficient in a particular logistic regression model using both the complete and split data sets were compared. This comparison suggests that the loss in efficiency of the split questionnaire design decreases as the correlation among the variables that are within different parts increases. The proposed multiple imputation method seems to be sensitive to the skewness and relatively insensitive to the kurtosis, contrary to the assumed normality of the distribution for the observables.