Processes of Item Nonresponse in Survey

碩士 === 國立中正大學 === 政治學所 === 93 === Abstract This research applied the data from Taiwan’s Election and Democratization Study, 2004: The Presidential Election (TEDS 2004P) for studying “item nonresponse”. The main purpose is to establish standard procedures for discovering how “nonresponse” formulated...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chien-Yu Lin, 林建宇
Other Authors: none
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Published: 2005
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/92938167624080735053
id ndltd-TW-093CCU05227013
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-TW-093CCU052270132015-11-09T04:04:06Z http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/92938167624080735053 Processes of Item Nonresponse in Survey 民意調查中項目無反應之處理 Chien-Yu Lin 林建宇 碩士 國立中正大學 政治學所 93 Abstract This research applied the data from Taiwan’s Election and Democratization Study, 2004: The Presidential Election (TEDS 2004P) for studying “item nonresponse”. The main purpose is to establish standard procedures for discovering how “nonresponse” formulated and handling these nonresponses in survey. Firstly, by using the probit model, it discusses the formulation of item nonresponse. Secondly, it manages the item nonresponse with applications of voting models and compares the different prediction results from the three models: probit model, selection bias model and multiple imputation. The research shows that, in the study of TEDS2004P, the factors causing nonresponse for interviewees on answering the presidential votes are “media use” and “party identification”. These two variables serve as the variables in selection equation for selection bias model. In addition, on processing the nonresponse, the probit model is used for models without further modifications and election bias model deals with the nonresponses that are not appeared at random. As for the multiple imputation, it assumes the nonresponses are all at random and takes further steps. The overall research design compares to process or not, the results of the nonresponses whether are missing at random, MAR, or not missing at random, NMAR. However, it is impossible to know the parameter in survey. Therefore, it uses the prediction of candidates’ voting rates as comparison standards. The results show that selection bias model can best reveal the nonresponses and, with the assumption of NMAR, it gets the closest prediction. The results are not surprising at all. According to the survey time of TEDS2004P and the social environment at the time, there are great possibilities to cause the nonresponses not at random. For this reason, the time and spatial factors of a survey could influence the prediction results of models. none 黃紀 2005 學位論文 ; thesis 107 zh-TW
collection NDLTD
language zh-TW
format Others
sources NDLTD
description 碩士 === 國立中正大學 === 政治學所 === 93 === Abstract This research applied the data from Taiwan’s Election and Democratization Study, 2004: The Presidential Election (TEDS 2004P) for studying “item nonresponse”. The main purpose is to establish standard procedures for discovering how “nonresponse” formulated and handling these nonresponses in survey. Firstly, by using the probit model, it discusses the formulation of item nonresponse. Secondly, it manages the item nonresponse with applications of voting models and compares the different prediction results from the three models: probit model, selection bias model and multiple imputation. The research shows that, in the study of TEDS2004P, the factors causing nonresponse for interviewees on answering the presidential votes are “media use” and “party identification”. These two variables serve as the variables in selection equation for selection bias model. In addition, on processing the nonresponse, the probit model is used for models without further modifications and election bias model deals with the nonresponses that are not appeared at random. As for the multiple imputation, it assumes the nonresponses are all at random and takes further steps. The overall research design compares to process or not, the results of the nonresponses whether are missing at random, MAR, or not missing at random, NMAR. However, it is impossible to know the parameter in survey. Therefore, it uses the prediction of candidates’ voting rates as comparison standards. The results show that selection bias model can best reveal the nonresponses and, with the assumption of NMAR, it gets the closest prediction. The results are not surprising at all. According to the survey time of TEDS2004P and the social environment at the time, there are great possibilities to cause the nonresponses not at random. For this reason, the time and spatial factors of a survey could influence the prediction results of models.
author2 none
author_facet none
Chien-Yu Lin
林建宇
author Chien-Yu Lin
林建宇
spellingShingle Chien-Yu Lin
林建宇
Processes of Item Nonresponse in Survey
author_sort Chien-Yu Lin
title Processes of Item Nonresponse in Survey
title_short Processes of Item Nonresponse in Survey
title_full Processes of Item Nonresponse in Survey
title_fullStr Processes of Item Nonresponse in Survey
title_full_unstemmed Processes of Item Nonresponse in Survey
title_sort processes of item nonresponse in survey
publishDate 2005
url http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/92938167624080735053
work_keys_str_mv AT chienyulin processesofitemnonresponseinsurvey
AT línjiànyǔ processesofitemnonresponseinsurvey
AT chienyulin mínyìdiàocházhōngxiàngmùwúfǎnyīngzhīchùlǐ
AT línjiànyǔ mínyìdiàocházhōngxiàngmùwúfǎnyīngzhīchùlǐ
_version_ 1718126268446146560