Census 2000 Content Reinterview Survey : Accuracy of Data for Selected Population and Housing Characteristics as Measured by Reinterview

By Singer, Phyllis

Book Id: WPLBN0000582271
Format Type: PDF eBook
File Size: 27,350,040 KB.
Reproduction Date: 2005

Title:	Census 2000 Content Reinterview Survey : Accuracy of Data for Selected Population and Housing Characteristics as Measured by Reinterview
Author:	Singer, Phyllis
Volume:
Language:	English
Subject:	Government publications, Census., Census report
Collections:	U.S. Census Bureau Collection
Historic Publication Date:
Publisher:	U.S. Census Bureau Department


Citation APA MLA Chicago Singer, P. (n.d.). Census 2000 Content Reinterview Survey : Accuracy of Data for Selected Population and Housing Characteristics as Measured by Reinterview. Retrieved from http://gutenberg.cc/

Description
Statistical Reference Document

Excerpt
Excerpt: The Content Reinterview Survey was designed to evaluate the consistency of responses to Census 2000 questionnaire. Understanding the accuracy and reliability of census data aids both data users and census planners. Data users need to determine how errors in the data might affect the conclusions they draw from analyzing census data. Census planners use measures of consistency to develop and test methods to improve the quality of future censuses ...

Table of Contents
CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxi 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Why do the CRS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.3 Overview of CRS 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.4 Overview of CRS 2000 report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2.1 How we conducted the survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2 (Un)edited census data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3 How we prepared the dataset for analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.4 Measures of response error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.5 Applying quality assurance procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3. LIMITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3.1 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3.2 Replication of census enumeration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3.3 Sampling variability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 3.4 Sources of response error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.5 Form type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.6 Noninterviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.7 Matching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.8 Timing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4. RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.1 How consistent were census long-form data for population characteristics? . . . . . . . 16 4.2 Did the Hispanic-origin and race questions provide consistent data? . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 4.3 How consistent were census long-form data for housing characteristics? . . . . . . . . . 59 4.4 How consistent were census long-form data by census collection type? . . . . . . . . . . 93 4.5 How consistent were census long-form data by respondent type? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 4.6 How did the inconsistency in 2000 compare to the inconsistency in 1990? . . . . . . . 95