Statalist


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: Poststratification weights


From   "Austin Nichols" <austinnichols@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Poststratification weights
Date   Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:28:37 -0500

Michael I. Lichter <mlichter@buffalo.edu>:
Assuming you specify the same strata for both cases, there should be
no difference, I believe:

*note survwgt on SSC: ssc inst survwgt
webuse poststrata, clear
survwgt post weight, by(type) t(postwgt) replace
svyset, strata(type) poststrata(type) postweight(postwgt)
svy: mean totexp
qui svyset [pw=weight], strata(type)
svy: mean totexp

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Michael I. Lichter
<mlichter@buffalo.edu> wrote:
> In the Stata svy commands, what is the difference between creating your own
> poststratification weight (e.g. using -survwgt-) and treating it as a
> pweight (through -svyset [pw=x], strata(y)-) vs. telling Stata (through
> -svyset, poststrata(y) postweight(z)-) that you have a postratification
> variable and cell count? This shouldn't affect point estimates, but how does
> Stata treat the two differently with respect to variance calculations or
> anything else? Thanks. (I would RTFM if I had access to one, and I didn't
> find a FAQ or any discussion on the topic. I am using Stata 9.2, FWIW.)
*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/



© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index