IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sankha/v86y2024i1d10.1007_s13171-023-00327-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bayesian Ideas in Survey Sampling: The Legacy of Basu

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Di Zio

    (Istituto Nazionale di Statistica)

  • Brunero Liseo

    (MEMOTEF, Sapienza Università di Roma)

  • Maria Giovanna Ranalli

    (Dept. of Political Science, University of Perugia)

Abstract

Survey sampling and, more generally, Official Statistics are experiencing an important renovation time. On one hand, there is the need to exploit the huge information potentiality that the digital revolution made available in terms of data. On the other hand, this process occurred simultaneously with a progressive deterioration of the quality of classical sample surveys, due to a decreasing willingness to participate and an increasing rate of missing responses. The switch from survey-based inference to a hybrid system involving register-based information has made more stringent the debate and the possible resolution of the design-based versus model-based approaches controversy. In this new framework, the use of statistical models seems unavoidable and it is today a relevant part of the official statistician toolkit. Models are important in several different contexts, from Small area estimation to non sampling error adjustment, but they are also crucial for correcting bias due to over and undercoverage of administrative data, in order to prevent potential selection bias, and to deal with different definitions and/or errors in the measurement process of the administrative sources. The progressive shift from a design-based to a model-based approach in terms of super-population is a matter of fact in the practice of the National Statistical Institutes. However, the introduction of Bayesian ideas in official statistics still encounters difficulties and resistance. In this work, we attempt a non-systematic review of the Bayesian development in this area and try to highlight the extra benefit that a Bayesian approach might provide. Our general conclusion is that, while the general picture is today clear and most of the basic topics of survey sampling can be easily rephrased and tackled from a Bayesian perspective, much work is still necessary for the availability of a ready-to-use platform of Bayesian survey sampling in the presence of complex sampling design, non-ignorable missing data patterns, and large datasets.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Di Zio & Brunero Liseo & Maria Giovanna Ranalli, 2024. "Bayesian Ideas in Survey Sampling: The Legacy of Basu," Sankhya A: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Springer;Indian Statistical Institute, vol. 86(1), pages 71-94, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:sankha:v:86:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s13171-023-00327-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s13171-023-00327-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13171-023-00327-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13171-023-00327-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Little, Roderick J., 2006. "Calibrated Bayes: A Bayes/Frequentist Roadmap," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 60, pages 213-223, August.
    2. Berger, James O. & Sun, Dongchu & Song, Chengyuan, 2020. "An objective prior for hyperparameters in normal hierarchical models," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    3. Susan M. Paddock, 2002. "Bayesian nonparametric multiple imputation of partially observed data with ignorable nonresponse," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 89(3), pages 529-538, August.
    4. J E Johndrow & K Lum & D B Dunson, 2018. "Theoretical limits of microclustering for record linkage," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 105(2), pages 431-446.
    5. Éric Lesage & David Haziza & Xavier D’Haultfœuille, 2019. "A Cautionary Tale on Instrumental Calibration for the Treatment of Nonignorable Unit Nonresponse in Surveys," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 114(526), pages 906-915, April.
    6. Daniela Cocchi & Lorenzo Marchi & Riccardo Ievoli, 2022. "Bayesian Bootstrap in Multiple Frames," Stats, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-11, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dipak Dey & Subhashis Ghosal & Tapas Samanta, 2024. "Editorial Article: Remembering D. Basu’s Legacy in Statistics," Sankhya A: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Springer;Indian Statistical Institute, vol. 86(1), pages 1-7, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chun Asaph Young & Schouten Barry & Wagner James, 2017. "JOS Special Issue on Responsive and Adaptive Survey Design: Looking Back to See Forward – Editorial: In Memory of Professor Stephen E. Fienberg, 1942–2016," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 571-577, September.
    2. D. A. S. Fraser & N. Reid & E. Marras & G. Y. Yi, 2010. "Default priors for Bayesian and frequentist inference," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 72(5), pages 631-654, November.
    3. Denis Devaud & Yves Tillé, 2019. "Deville and Särndal’s calibration: revisiting a 25-years-old successful optimization problem," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 28(4), pages 1033-1065, December.
    4. David Kaplan & Chansoon Lee, 2018. "Optimizing Prediction Using Bayesian Model Averaging: Examples Using Large-Scale Educational Assessments," Evaluation Review, , vol. 42(4), pages 423-457, August.
    5. John Geweke, 2007. "Bayesian Model Comparison and Validation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 60-64, May.
    6. Perry J. Williams & Cody Schroeder & Pat Jackson, 2020. "Estimating Reproduction and Survival of Unmarked Juveniles Using Aerial Images and Marked Adults," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 25(2), pages 133-147, June.
    7. Carles Serrat & Montserrat Ru� & Carmen Armero & Xavier Piulachs & H�ctor Perpi��n & Anabel Forte & �lvaro P�ez & Guadalupe G�mez, 2015. "Frequentist and Bayesian approaches for a joint model for prostate cancer risk and longitudinal prostate-specific antigen data," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(6), pages 1223-1239, June.
    8. Stavros Nikolakopoulos & Ingeborg van der Tweel & Kit C. B. Roes, 2018. "Dynamic borrowing through empirical power priors that control type I error," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(3), pages 874-880, September.
    9. Fabian Krüger & Sebastian Lerch & Thordis Thorarinsdottir & Tilmann Gneiting, 2021. "Predictive Inference Based on Markov Chain Monte Carlo Output," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 89(2), pages 274-301, August.
    10. J. G. Liao & Duanping Liao & Arthur Berg, 2016. "Calibrated Bayes Factors in Assessing Genetic Association Models," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(3), pages 250-256, July.
    11. Costa, Dora L. & Yetter, Noelle & DeSomer, Heather, 2020. "Wartime health shocks and the postwar socioeconomic status and mortality of union army veterans and their children," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    12. M. Giovanna Ranalli & Alina Matei & Andrea Neri, 2023. "Generalised calibration with latent variables for the treatment of unit nonresponse in sample surveys," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 32(1), pages 169-195, March.
    13. David Kaplan & Jianshen Chen & Sinan Yavuz & Weicong Lyu, 2023. "Bayesian Dynamic Borrowing of Historical Information with Applications to the Analysis of Large-Scale Assessments," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 1-30, March.
    14. Marco Di Zio & Ugo Guarnera, 2008. "A multiple imputation method for non-Gaussian data," Metron - International Journal of Statistics, Dipartimento di Statistica, Probabilità e Statistiche Applicate - University of Rome, vol. 0(1), pages 75-90.
    15. West Brady T. & Sakshaug Joseph W. & Aurelien Guy Alain S., 2018. "Accounting for Complex Sampling in Survey Estimation: A Review of Current Software Tools," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 34(3), pages 721-752, September.
    16. Adam J. Branscum & Timothy E. Hanson, 2008. "Bayesian Nonparametric Meta‐Analysis Using Polya Tree Mixture Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 64(3), pages 825-833, September.
    17. Hefley, Trevor J. & Tyre, Andrew J. & Blankenship, Erin E., 2013. "Fitting population growth models in the presence of measurement and detection error," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 263(C), pages 244-250.
    18. Zhan Liu & Chaofeng Tu & Yingli Pan, 2022. "Model-assisted calibration with SCAD to estimated control for non-probability samples," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 31(4), pages 849-879, October.
    19. B. J. Gajewski & R. Lee & M. Bott & U. Piamjariyakul & R. L. Taunton, 2009. "On estimating the distribution of data envelopment analysis efficiency scores: an application to nursing homes' care planning process," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(9), pages 933-944.
    20. Ma, Zichen & Hanson, Timothy E., 2020. "Bayesian nonparametric test for independence between random vectors," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sankha:v:86:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s13171-023-00327-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.