Scott,
Thanks much. I guess I'll have to look through the manuals more carefully
next time.
Mike Frone
"Scott Merryman" <[email protected]>
Sent by: [email protected]
08/14/03 08:53 PM
Please respond to statalist
To: <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: st: Re: using sample weights in the absence of stratification and
clustering
----- Original Message -----
From: [email protected]
Subject: st: using sample weights in the absence of stratification and
clustering
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 19:00:18 -0400
> I would be grateful if someone could help me understand the basic issue
> involved in using sampling weights in the absence of stratification and
> clustering.
> If I compute the weighted mean and standard error of a variable in
> SPSS(using the sample weight) or in Stata using -ci- and aweights, I
get
> the same estimates for the weighted mean and standard error. However,
if
> I use -svymean- with pweights, I get the same estimate for the weighted
> mean, but the standard error is different. There is a note on page 350
of
> [U] stating the standard error provided by SPSS or -ci- with aweights is
> not correct. I'm not sure why.
<snip>
There is a discussion of weighted estimation at [U] 23.16 and in
particular
[U]23.16.3.
aweighted estimation interprets larger weights to mean the data is more
accurately measured - pweights do not make this assumption.
Hope this helps,
Scott
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
