|
|||
|
lee.kitty@YAHOO.COM wrote:
>I'm interested in knowing more about proc surveymeans/surveyreg etc. I'm >reading David's recent sugi proceeding. > >http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi31/193-31.pdf You should have come to the SUGI presentation. That was more entertaining than the paper. >I know this topic came up a lot on sas-L. Just a quick question---what if I >have data from some probability sampling but have NO idea what kind of >sampling method the survey house used, i.e. I can't tell if it's a >stratified sample or not, even if it is, I have no idea what variable(s) >are >stratified on. Can I still use proc surveymeans/surveyreg? Not really. If you cannot get enough information to decide on stratification or clustering or sampling weights, then you're stuck. Even papers like Dumouchel and Duncan indicate that you have to have some idea what the samplnig weights are, and what are rational surrogates for the strata. If you cannot get info about the design effects and the weights from the survey house, then play hardball. Make a business case to your boss that the survey house is just wasting your company's money and he/she needs a new survey company. Explain that the data from the survey house can come up with drastically different answers depending on the real weights and design effects, and the survey house won't tell you, and that maybe they don't *know* this stuff and they're just ripping you off. Once you get some sort of buy-off on this idea, get your boss to pound on the survey house to squeeze this out of them. Of course, they may really *be* ripping you off. They may have totally inadequate samplnig designs with faulty fieldwork and lax data collection, so that their data are garbage. >David's examples suggest that results can be significantly diff. If I'm in >the dark with no information about the sampling method of my data and use >regular proc means/proc reg, is there a way to gauge how off are my >estimates are? Not really. You can make wild guesses about the sampling weights and the design effects and plug those into the models, but that only tells you a worst-case situation, not a meaningful one. But if you have ten different scenarios to show your boss, and they yield a wide range of results that are a lot wider than your company can endure, then that's evidence that you desperately need the design information, and the survey house is possibly in violation of their contract with your company since the data are not usable. I'm sure the survey house would *love* a nice big lawsuit that would cost them a huge amount of business as well, and put them in a really bad light. :-) Sorry I couldn't be of more help, David -- David L. Cassell mathematical statistician Design Pathways 3115 NW Norwood Pl. Corvallis OR 97330 __________________________________________________ _______________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/g...ave/direct/01/ |
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Re: FW: PROC FREQ--DATA STEP--MODELING QUESTION: PROC FREQ memory | Tom White | Newsgroup comp.soft-sys.sas | 0 | 06-07-2007 05:14 PM |
| Re: PROC FREQ--DATA STEP--MODELING QUESTION | nospam@HOWLES.COM (Howard Schreier | Newsgroup comp.soft-sys.sas | 0 | 06-07-2007 02:04 AM |
| Re: PROC FREQ--DATA STEP--MODELING QUESTION | toby dunn | Newsgroup comp.soft-sys.sas | 0 | 06-06-2007 07:51 PM |
| Re: PROC FREQ--DATA STEP--MODELING QUESTION | Gerstle, John | Newsgroup comp.soft-sys.sas | 0 | 06-06-2007 07:47 PM |
| Re: Proc Export Question | Xu Libin | Newsgroup comp.soft-sys.sas | 0 | 11-03-2005 05:26 PM |