Non‐Response Insights With Binary Variables

Summary Non‐response brings into question the critical ability of probability surveys to make unbiased estimates of population parameters and to estimate the reliability of these estimates. This article considers the bias of estimates in a simple setting to help clarify some of the complex issues arising from non‐response. We show the limitation of focusing solely on the correlation between the outcome variable and the propensity to respond without considering the distribution of the response propensities. The relationship between the survey response rate and non‐response bias is also reconsidered. An important practical result is that data collection efforts to increase response rates moderately may not substantially decrease non‐response bias for most statistics. Our results support other studies showing non‐response adjusted estimates remain subject to non‐response bias and that current inference procedures that act as if the bias is eliminated produce confidence intervals that are too narrow. The findings show that proposed adjustments such as doubling margins of error may not be adequate to achieve nominal levels in some cases.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Statistical Review
Published
2025-08-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/insr.70006
Primary Topic
Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Non‐Response Insights With Binary Variables

Courtney Kennedy, J. Michael Brick, Andrew W. Mercer, Sharon L. Lohr
International Statistical Review
Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
article

Non‐Response Insights With Binary Variables

Courtney Kennedy, J. Michael Brick, Andrew W. Mercer, Sharon L. Lohr
article en

Abstract

Summary Non‐response brings into question the critical ability of probability surveys to make unbiased estimates of population parameters and to estimate the reliability of these estimates. This article considers the bias of estimates in a simple setting to help clarify some of the complex issues arising from non‐response. We show the limitation of focusing solely on the correlation between the outcome variable and the propensity to respond without considering the distribution of the response propensities. The relationship between the survey response rate and non‐response bias is also reconsidered. An important practical result is that data collection efforts to increase response rates moderately may not substantially decrease non‐response bias for most statistics. Our results support other studies showing non‐response adjusted estimates remain subject to non‐response bias and that current inference procedures that act as if the bias is eliminated produce confidence intervals that are too narrow. The findings show that proposed adjustments such as doubling margins of error may not be adequate to achieve nominal levels in some cases.

International Statistical Review
Pew Research Center (US), Westat (United States) (US), Arizona State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.