Probability-Sampling Approach to Editing

Authors

  • Maiki Ilves Department of Statistics, Örebro University, Sweden
  • Thomas Laitila Department of Statistics, Örebro University, Sweden Research and Development Department, Statistics Sweden

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17713/ajs.v38i3.270

Abstract

Editing for measurement errors is always part of data processing. In traditional editing, all data records are checked for errors and inconsistencies. In a new way of editing, only the subset with the most important erroneous responses is considered for editing. This approach is applied in selective editing procedures, which have been shown to save resources considerably. However, selective editing lacks a probabilistic basis and the properties of estimators cannot be established using standard methods. In particular,
bias properties of the estimator are unknown except for level estimates based on historical data. This paper proposes combining selective editing with an editing procedure based on the traditional probability-sampling framework. The variance of a bias-corrected Horvitz-Thompson estimator is derived and a variance estimator is proposed. The results of a simulation study support the use of the combined editing procedure.

References

Granquist, L., and Kovar, J. G. (1997). Editing of survey data: How much is enough? In L. E. Lyberg et al. (Eds.), Survey Measurement and Process Quality (p. 415-435). New York: Wiley.

Hedlin, D. (2003). Score functions to reduce business survey editing at the U.K. office for national statistics. Journal of Official Statistics, 19, 177-199.

Hoogland, J. (2002). Selective editing by means of plausibility indicators. Proceedings of Conference of European Statisticians. (UNECE Work Session on Statistical Data Editing, Helsinki, Finland. Working Paper no. 33)

Latouche, M., and Berthelot, J.-M. (1992). Use of score function to prioritize and limit recontacts in editing business surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 8, 389-400.

Lawrence, D., and McDavitt, C. (1994). Significance editing in the australian survey of average weekly earnings. Journal of Official Statistics, 10, 437-447.

Lawrence, D., and McKenzie, R. (2000). The general application of significance editing. Journal of Official Statistics, 16, 243-253.

Lessler, J. T., and Kalsbeek, W. D. (1992). Nonsampling Error in Surveys. New York: Wiley.

Madow, W. G. (1965). On some aspects of response error measurement. Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section, ASA, 16, 182-192.

Rao, J. N. K., and Sitter, R. R. (1997). Variance estimation under stratified two-phase sampling with applications to measurement bias. In L. E. Lyberg et al. (Eds.), Survey Measurement and Process Quality (p. 753-768). New York: Wiley.

Särndal, C.-E., Swensson, B., and Wretman, J. (1992). Model Assisted Survey Sampling. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Statistics Canada. (2003). The use of a score function in a data collection context. Proceedings of Conference of European Statisticians. (UNECE Work Session on Statistical Data Editing, Madrid, Spain. Working Paper no. 28)

Statistics Sweden. (2005). A selective editing method considering both suspicion and potential impact, developed and applied to the swedish foreign trade statistics. Proceedings of Conference of European Statisticians. (UNECE Work Session on Statistical

Data Editing, Ottawa, Canada. Working Paper no. 12)

Published

2016-04-03

How to Cite

Ilves, M., & Laitila, T. (2016). Probability-Sampling Approach to Editing. Austrian Journal of Statistics, 38(3), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.17713/ajs.v38i3.270

Issue

Section

Articles