21
An example of longitudinal LFS weights [email protected] Division for general methodology and standards

An example of longitudinal LFS weights [email protected] Division for general methodology and standards

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

An example of longitudinal LFS weights

[email protected]

Division for general methodology and standards

Page 2: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

LFS panel sample sizes (number of households) for the years 2012 and 2013

Page 3: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Data collection

• First wave – CAPI• Repeated waves – (predominantly) CATI

• Nonresponding households from previous quarters are not included in the panel sample

• Response rate: in first wave – 66%;

in repeated waves – 83% • Average households size for responding households ~

2,75 members

Page 4: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Number of responding individuals

Page 5: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Number of responding individuals – 15 years +

Page 6: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Non-response distribution of the longitudinal sample – 3rd to 4th quarter 2013

2012Q3 / 2012Q4 Households % 2nd wave 3rd wave 5th wave

Sample 3769   1641 1252 876

Ineligible 3 0,1% 0,1% 0,1% 0,0%

Response 3135 83,2% 77,2% 85,0% 91,8%

Nonresponse 631 16,8% 22,7% 14,9% 8,2%

- Refusals 425 67,4% 65,6% 71,7% 65,3%

- Noncontacts 84 13,3% 14,8% 11,2% 11,1%

- Other 122 19,3% 19,6% 17,1% 23,6%

Page 7: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Attrition by selected relevant characteristics of the household (completion rate)

Page 8: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Weighting steps

• Cross-sectional design weights (on strata and wave level)

• Cross-sectional non-response weghts (on strata and wave level)

• Longitudinal non-response wave (on strata level, to response statuses at the final quarter)

• Grossing up to population total (wave level)

• Calibration to demographic data (all data together, to first quarter situation)

• Calibration to main employment statuses (all data together, to first quarter situation)

+ Calibration to demographic data (all data together, to first quarter situation)

+ Calibration to main employment statuses (all data together, to first quarter situation)

Page 9: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Longitudinal population Q – Q (July 1st 2013 vs. Oct 1st 2013)

3th quarter 2013 3th and 4th quarter 2013 4th quarter 2013

Male Female Male Female Male Female

0 - 14 years 153.993 145.295 153.678 144.998 154.432 145.840

15 - 64 years 721.773 682.194 718.959 680.540 720.853 681.283

65 years + 143.892 211.967 142.177 209.948 145.170 213.085

Total 1.019.658 1.039.456 1.014.814 1.035.486 1.020.455 1.040.208

2.059.114 2.050.300 2.060.663

Page 10: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Longitudinal population Y – Y (Oct 1st 2012 vs. Oct 1st 2013)

4th quarter 2012 4h quarter 2012 and 2013 4th quarter 2013

Male Female Male Female Male Female

0 - 14 years 152.786 144.173 151.971 143.441 154.432 145.840

15 - 64 years 724.926 685.520 715.330 679.943 720.853 681.283

65 years + 140.765 209.953 133.570 200.967 145.170 213.085

Total 1.018.477 1.039.646 1.000.871 1.024.351 1.020.455 1.040.208

2.058.123 2.025.222 2.060.663

Page 11: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Basic descriptive statistics for the Q – Q longitudinal weight,compared to standard quarterly weight, 3rd quarter 2013

  n mean stddev min q1 q3 max population

W_LONG13q3 8.534 241,28 165,47 14,28 139,87 290,16 1.675,99 2.059.114

W_CROS13q3 15.486 132,97 90,25 10,79 76,44 159,86 1.100,41 2.059.114

Page 12: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Changes in main employment statuses for the cohort, interviewed in 3rd and 4th quarter 2013

– using longitudinal weight

2013Q3 / 2013Q4 Unemloyed Employed Inactive Population under 15

  in 1000 % in 1000 % in 1000 % in 1000 %

Unemployed 48 50 22 23 26 27   

Employed 13 1 865 94 45 5   

Inactive 21 3 45 6 677 91   

Population under 15     4 1 294 99

Page 13: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Changes in main employment statuses for the cohort, interviewed in 3rd and 4th quarter 2013

– using longitudinal weight

Employed922

Inactive741

Uneemployed96

45

22

4513

26

21

82 vs. 97 752 vs. 753

932 vs. 910

Page 14: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Relative standard errors for estimates of changes in main employment statuses for the cohort, interviewed in 3rd and

4th quarter 2013 – using longitudilan weight

2013Q3 / 2013Q4 Unemployed Employed Inactive Population under 15

CV % % % %

Unemployed 6 12 10  

Employed 15 1 9  

Inactive 13 8 1  

Population under 15     23 2

Page 15: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Changes in main employment statuses for the cohort, interviewed in 3rd and 4th quarter 2013

– unweighted estimates

2013Q3 / 2013Q4 Unemloyed Employed Inactive Population under 15

  % % % %

Unemployed 51  21   28    

Employed 1  93   5    

Inactive 3   7   91    

Population under 15           2   98

Page 16: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Y - Y

Page 17: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Basic descriptive statistics for the Y – Y longitudinal weight,compared to standard quarterly weight, 4rd quarter 2012

  n mean stddev min q1 q3 max population

W_LONG12q4 4.492 457,76 323,66 41,07 251,14 561,56 3.798,98 2.056.262

W_CROS12q4 14.407 142,73 98,09 15,65 81,96 170,59 1.225,36 2.056.262

Page 18: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Changes in main employment statuses for the cohort, interviewed in 4th quarter 2012 and 2013

– using longitudinal weight

2012Q4 / 2013Q4 Unemloyed Employed Inactive Population under 15

  in 1000 % in 1000 % in 1000 % in 1000 %

Unemployed 38 39 35 36 24 25   

Employed 25 3 841 91 56 6   

Inactive 27 4 68 9 645 87   

Population under 15     2 1 19 7 274 93

Page 19: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Relative standard errors for estimates of changes in main employment statuses for the cohort, interviewed in 4th

quarter 2012 and 2013 – using longitudilan weight

2012Q4 / 2013Q4 Unemployed Employed Inactive Population under 15

CV % % % %

Unemployed 9 13 11  

Employed 15 2 11  

Inactive 14 9 2  

Population under 15    88 16 2

Page 20: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Changes in main employment statuses for the cohort, interviewed in 4th quarter 2012 and 2013

– unweighted estimates

2012Q4 / 2013Q4 Unemloyed Employed Inactive Population under 15

  % % % %

Unemployed 42  33   25    

Employed 3  91   6    

Inactive 3   9   88    

Population under 15           7   93

Page 21: An example of longitudinal LFS weights Katja.Rutar@gov.si Division for general methodology and standards

Conclusions & Open questions

• There are many possibilities to calculate longitudinal weights.

• At each separate stage of weighting process some assumptions have to be taken.

• Should we give priority to consistency of employment statuses, nonresponse adjustment, demographic distribution, at which point of time?