:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:Is Weighting a Routine or Something that Needs to be Justified?
書刊名:選舉研究
作者:劉從葦 引用關係陳光輝 引用關係
作者(外文):Liu, Tsung-weiChen, Kuang-hui
出版日期:2005
卷期:12:2
頁次:頁149-187
主題關鍵詞:加權單位無反應項目無反應臺灣選舉與民主化調查WeightingUnit non-responseItem non-responseTEDS
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(4) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:37
  • 點閱點閱:32
經由抽樣設計恰當的調查研究所收集到的樣本資料應該能夠準確估計母體參數。但是因為單位無反應的問題,執行調查的單位或分析資料的學者通常會以加權的方式來減少樣本統計量與母體參數之間的差距。加權後的資料在人口學變項上比未加權資料較為接近母體參數,因此加權似乎是一個合理處理樣本資料的做法。 然而,即使加權是可行的解決方法,也絕非萬靈丹。在加權前也必需提出事後操弄資料的理由,而不是將加權視為理所當然。本文以台灣選舉與民主化調查為例,首先說明加權後的資料不必然較接近母體參數的原因。投票率、各政黨得票率、與婚姻狀況在加權後反而和母體參數有較大的差距。 除了單一變數分析之外,當討論的主題是變數間的關係時,加權可能增加也可能減少相關性的強度。雖然加權似乎會影響相關性,但其影響究竟是更接近真實的關係,抑或是扭曲真正的相關性則不得而知。此外,通常對整筆資料作加權只處理了單元無反應的問題,但仍然沒有解決多變量分析一定會遇到的項目無反應問題。 不論是單一變數分析或是多變量分析,在加權之前應該先嘗試其他增加樣本代表性與提高資料品質的方法。如果沒有先投入更多時間與心力在問卷設計、抽樣設計、訪員訓練與監督上,加權只是低成本的取巧做法。最後,假使一定要加權,必須說明與討論為什麼要加權、以哪些變數加權、如何加權、以及加權所產生的影響,而非不加思考地將加權當作例行公事。
Survey research as a method of collecting sample data is supposed to produce sample statistics which can estimate the corresponding population parameters if the sampling design is appropriate. However, for reasons such as unit non-response, survey data is usually weighted by the institutes that collect the data or by researchers who analyse the data in order to correct or diminish the discrepancies between sample and population. Sample statis-tics based on weighted data are more representative of the population para-meters than unweighted data in terms of some demographic characteristics. Therefore, to some extent, it seems legitimate to weight data and this ma-nipulation has become a routine when dealing with survey data. It is true that to weight data could be helpful, but this manipulation ne-eds justifications. This paper therefore tries to argue that to weight data is no panacea and should not be taken for granted when considering the exam-ples in Taiwan’s Election and Democratization Studies (TEDS) surveys. The first section discusses why weighted data is not necessarily representative of the population. As the TEDS surveys show, the turnout, the vote shares of parties, and marital status become more deviant from the population para-meters after weighting the data.
期刊論文
1.劉義周(19961000)。測不到的誤差:訪員執行訪問時的偏誤。調查研究,2,35-58。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.洪永泰(20031100)。原始樣本、替代樣本、與追蹤樣本的比較:「2001年臺灣選舉與民主化調查研究」訪問失敗問題的探討。選舉研究,10(2),37-58。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.黃紀、張佑宗(20031100)。樣本代表性檢定與最小差異加權:以2001年臺灣選舉與民主化調查為例。選舉研究,10(2),1-35。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.Traugott, Michael W.、Belli, Robert F.、Young, Margaret、McGonagle, Katherine A.(1999)。Reducing Vote Overreporting in Surveys。Public Opinion Quarterly,63(1),90-108。  new window
5.Converse, Jean M.(1976)。Predicting No Opinion in the Polls。Public Opinion Quarterly,40,515-530。  new window
6.Curtice, John(1997)。So How Well did They Do? The Polls in 1997 Election。Journal of Market Research Society,39,449-461。  new window
7.Curtice, John、Sparrow, Nick(1997)。How Accurate Are Traditional Quota Opinion Polls。Journal of Market Research Society,39,433-448。  new window
8.Jowell, Roger、Hedges, Barry、Lynn, Peter、Farrant, Graham、Heath, Anthony(1993)。The 1992 British Election: The Failure of the Polls。Public Opinion Quarterly,57(2),238-263。  new window
9.Martinez, Michael D.(2003)。Comment on "Voter Turnout and the National Election Studies"。Political Analysis,11(2),187-192。  new window
10.Presser, Stanley(1990)。Can Changes in Context Reduce Vote Overporting in Surveys?。Public Opinion Quarterly,54(4),586-593。  new window
11.Reese, Stephen D.、Miller, Mark M.(1981)。Political Attitude Holding and Structure The Effects of Newspaper and Television News。Communication Research,8(2),167-188。  new window
研究報告
1.臺灣選舉與民主化調查規劃與推動委員會(2004)。2002年至2004年「選舉與民主化調查」三年期研究規劃(II):民國九十二年民主化與政治變遷民調案。0。  延伸查詢new window
2.黃紀、朱雲漢、胡佛、劉義周、陳義彥、陳文俊、黃秀端、徐火炎、吳玉山(2001)。臺灣選舉與民主化調查:民國九十年立法委員選舉全國大型民意調查研究 (計畫編號:NSC90-2420-H-194-001)。國立政治大學選舉研究中心。  延伸查詢new window
3.黃紀(2003)。2002年至2004年「選舉與民主化調查」三年期研究規劃(I):民國九十一年北高兩市選舉大型面訪案。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Sniderman, P.、Brody, R.、Tetlock, P.(1991)。Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology。Cambridge, Mass:Harvard University Press。  new window
2.Groves, R. M.(1989)。Survey errors and survey costs。New York:John Wiley & Sons。  new window
3.Neuman, W. Russell(1986)。The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Electorate。Harvard University Press。  new window
圖書論文
1.Abelson, Robert P.、Loftus, Elizabeth F.、Greenwald, Anthony G.(1992)。Attempts to Improve the Accuracy of Self-Reports of Voting。Questions about Questions: Inquiries into the cognitive bases of survey。New York:Russell Sage Foundation。  new window
2.洪永泰(2000)。抽樣調查資料的加權處理。政治學的範圍與方法。臺北:五南圖書出版公司。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE