The question cannot be answered without first determining WHICH
population is to be sampled reliably?  Is "population" intended to
mean "the population of all cinema-going people?" On this
interpretation, the question asks, "how often do those who go to
cinema typically go (per week, month, or other unit of time as "rate"
implies)?'  On this interpretation, surveying outside the cinema is by
far the best method, because it selectively questions only members of
the cinema-going population.  It is questionable whether a "rate"
based on any other population would be meaningful.  If we discovered
that the total number of movie visits in, say, Burma, represents a
population rate of 0.023 times per week, this tells us nothing of how
often Burmese people go to the cinema.  Chances are, vast numbers of
people almost never go, while some small group of people go with some
regularity.  Only the latter are really relevant, unless its a
question about market saturation, in which case rate is the wrong
measure.....I would think you'd first want a head count (e.g.,
movie-goers per capita).

A postal survey is a loser because reliability depends upon the
representativeness of the returns.  People who return postal surveys
constitute a self-defined sub-population of the specified group, and
return rates tend to be dismal, especially on such trivial kinds of
impersonal data.

I'm not beaurocratically sophisticated enough to know exactly what is
meant by a register, but I take it to be a town-hall listing of
residence occupancy that would likely be fairly accurate in
identifying who lives where.  I think I might regard the census or
registry in principle as the best definition of the general
(geographic/national/regional) population for purposes of sampling.
The census is compiled for the purpose of listing everyone (it strives
to be  fully inclusive) which, though imperfect, is by definition what
is required for a proper random sampling (identify all possible
members of the population and ensure each has an equal probability of
being selected).  That it is a "household survey" says we go to them,
and are not dependent upon the number (and type) of people who choose
to return their responses.  I think 3 is therefore the best answer if
the term "population" is intended to mean "geopolitical body," and the
concerns mentioned above can be dismissed (viz a viz, the cinema-going
population).

A house to house survey in the evening would not be better than a
sampling of people listed in a census or registry because it further
requires that people be home in the evening.  People who go out in the
evening (for example, cinema-goers) would be unable to answer the
survey, so a hopeless bias would be introduced.

I would be tempted to administer a question like this in essay form
precisely to see if the student understands the first critical
issue--defining the population of interest.  I'd say #4 if population
is geopolitically defined, or #3 if we are specifically interested
only in the cinema-going population.

I hope you will post the anwer.

Dessie

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!STAT IS LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:14:28 +0100, George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>from a past exam, I have the following question:
>
>Which type of sample survey would provide the most reliable data on the
>frequency of cinema-going of the population?
>
>only one of 1,2,3,4 is "correct":
>
>1)   A house to house survey in the evening
>2)   A postal survey based on the electoral list
>3)   Interviewing outside the cinema
>4)   A household survey based on a population census or register
>
>-------
>I can assume cost of the survey is not an issue right? then 2 is out, as
>1 is better than 2 for reliability. 
>3 is out of the question as it does not cover the general population.
>
>So I think either 1 or 4 must be correct.
>But 4 is similar to 1, so what is the difference between a census and a
>Register??? and between a Register and a (i.e. electoral) List???
>BTW a household survey is also presumably done from house to house, and
>not via post ?
>
>Thanks for your help. particularly, Dr. Paul Gardner for his past help
>in a similar question
>on finite sampling.
>
>George
>
>-for personal reply please remove SPAMLESS from my  email address.
>

.
.
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at:
.                  http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/                    .
=================================================================

Reply via email to