IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedawp/90079.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sample Bias Related to Household Role

Author

Listed:
  • Marcin Hitczenko

Abstract

This paper develops a two-stage statistical analysis to identify and assess the effect of a sample bias associated with an individual's household role. Survey responses to questions about the respondent's role in household finances and a sampling design in which some households have all members take the survey enable the estimation of distributions for each individual's share of household responsibility. The methodology is applied to the 2017 Survey of Consumer Payment Choice. The distribution of responsibility shares among survey respondents suggests that the sampling procedure favors household members with higher levels of responsibility. A bootstrap analysis reveals that population mean estimates of monthly payment instrument use that do not account for this type of sample misrepresentation are likely biased for instruments often used to make household purchases. For checks and electronic payments, analysis suggests it is likely that unadjusted estimates overstate true values by 10 percent to 20 percent.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcin Hitczenko, 2021. "Sample Bias Related to Household Role," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2021-9, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedawp:90079
    DOI: 10.29338/wp2021-09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.frbatlanta.org/-/media/documents/research/publications/wp/2021/02/03/09-sample-bias-related-to-household-role.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.29338/wp2021-09?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kott, Phillip S. & Chang, Ted, 2010. "Using Calibration Weighting to Adjust for Nonignorable Unit Nonresponse," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 105(491), pages 1265-1275.
    2. Park, David K. & Gelman, Andrew & Bafumi, Joseph, 2004. "Bayesian Multilevel Estimation with Poststratification: State-Level Estimates from National Polls," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 375-385.
    3. repec:mpr:mprres:4937 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Qin J. & Leung D. & Shao J., 2002. "Estimation With Survey Data Under Nonignorable Nonresponse or Informative Sampling," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 97, pages 193-200, March.
    5. repec:mpr:mprres:4780 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Wang, Wei & Rothschild, David & Goel, Sharad & Gelman, Andrew, 2015. "Forecasting elections with non-representative polls," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 980-991.
    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. Marcin Hitczenko, 2024. "Division of Financial Responsibility within Mixed-Gender Couples," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 819-835, December.

    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. Shixiao Zhang & Peisong Han & Changbao Wu, 2023. "Calibration Techniques Encompassing Survey Sampling, Missing Data Analysis and Causal Inference," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 91(2), pages 165-192, August.
    2. Jiwei Zhao & Jun Shao, 2015. "Semiparametric Pseudo-Likelihoods in Generalized Linear Models With Nonignorable Missing Data," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 110(512), pages 1577-1590, December.
    3. Guo, Xu & Song, Lianlian & Fang, Yun & Zhu, Lixing, 2019. "Model checking for general linear regression with nonignorable missing response," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 1-12.
    4. Cerina, Roberto & Duch, Raymond, 2020. "Measuring public opinion via digital footprints," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 987-1002.
    5. Wang, Lei & Zhao, Puying & Shao, Jun, 2021. "Dimension-reduced semiparametric estimation of distribution functions and quantiles with nonignorable nonresponse," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    6. Hamori, Shigeyuki & Motegi, Kaiji & Zhang, Zheng, 2019. "Calibration estimation of semiparametric copula models with data missing at random," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 85-109.
    7. Pengfei Li & Jing Qin & Yukun Liu, 2023. "Instability of inverse probability weighting methods and a remedy for nonignorable missing data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 3215-3226, December.
    8. Montalvo, José G. & Papaspiliopoulos, Omiros & Stumpf-Fétizon, Timothée, 2019. "Bayesian forecasting of electoral outcomes with new parties’ competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 52-70.
    9. Bruch, Christian & Felderer, Barbara, 2024. "An Approximation of Joint Distributions of Weighting Variables Using a Pseudo Population Approach," OSF Preprints pg2wt, Center for Open Science.
    10. José Garcia Montalvo & Omiros Papaspiliopoulos & Timothée Stumpf-Fétizon, 2018. "Bayesian forecasting of electoral outcomes with new parties' competition," Economics Working Papers 1624, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    11. José García-Montalvo & Omiros Papaspiliopoulos & Timothée Stumpf-Fétizon, 2018. "Bayesian Forecasting of Electoral Outcomes with new Parties' Competition," Working Papers 1065, Barcelona School of Economics.
    12. Temporão, Mickael & Dufresne, Yannick & Savoie, Justin & Linden, Clifton van der, 2019. "Crowdsourcing the vote: New horizons in citizen forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-10.
    13. Yonatan Ben-Shalom & Ignacio Martinez & Mariel Finucane, "undated". "Risk of Workforce Exit Due to Disability: State Differences in 2003–2016," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 8aed03744a06419dbda68be8c, Mathematica Policy Research.
    14. Skinner, Benjamin T. & Doyle, William R., 2024. "Predicting postsecondary attendance by family income in the United States using multilevel regression with poststratification," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    15. Laura C. Dawkins & Daniel B. Williamson & Stewart W. Barr & Sally R. Lampkin, 2020. "‘What drives commuter behaviour?': a Bayesian clustering approach for understanding opposing behaviours in social surveys," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(1), pages 251-280, January.
    16. Wang, Wei & Rothschild, David & Goel, Sharad & Gelman, Andrew, 2015. "Forecasting elections with non-representative polls," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 980-991.
    17. Mark Richard & Jan Vecer, 2021. "Efficiency Testing of Prediction Markets: Martingale Approach, Likelihood Ratio and Bayes Factor Analysis," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-20, February.
    18. Zhang, Jing & Wang, Qihua & Kang, Jian, 2020. "Feature screening under missing indicator imputation with non-ignorable missing response," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    19. Kobayashi, Yoshiharu & Heinrich, Tobias & Bryant, Kristin A., 2021. "Public support for development aid during the COVID-19 pandemic," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    20. Lauderdale, Benjamin E. & Bailey, Delia & Blumenau, Jack & Rivers, Douglas, 2020. "Model-based pre-election polling for national and sub-national outcomes in the US and UK," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 399-413.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    survey error; Bayesian interference; Survey of Consumer Payment Choice; bootstrap; household economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C11 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Bayesian Analysis: General
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:fip:fedawp:90079. 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: Rob Sarwark (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbatus.html .

    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.