Premium access provided by: MIT Personal account: Create | Sign in
Documentation: Census 1960 Tracts Only Set
you are here: choose a survey survey document chapter
Publisher: U.S. Census Bureau
Document: Marital Status (Volume II, Part IV - Subject Reports)
citation:
U.S. Bureau of the Census. U.S. Census of Population: 1960. Subject Reports, Marital Status. Final Report PC(2)-4E. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1966.
Marital Status (Volume II, Part IV - Subject Reports)
Sample Design and Sampling Variability
Sample Design
For persons in housing units at the time of the 1960 Census, the sampling unit was the housing unit and all its occupants; for persons in group quarters, it was the person. On the first visit to an address, the enumerator assigned a sample key letter (A, B, C, or D) to each housing unit sequentially in the order in which he first visited the units, whether or not he completed an interview. Each enumerator was given a random key letter to start his assignment, and the order of canvassing was indicated in advance, although these instructions allowed some latitude in the order of visiting addresses. Each housing unit to which the key letter "A" was assigned was designated as a sample unit, and all persons enumerated in the unit were included in the sample. In every group quarters, the sample consisted of every fourth person in the order listed. The 1960 statistics in this report are based on a subsample of one-fifth of the original 25-percent sample schedules. The subsample was selected on the computer, using a stratified systematic Sample Design. The strata were made up as follows: For persons in regular housing units there were 36 strata, i.e., 9 household size groups by 2 tenure groups by 2 color groups; for persons in group quarters, there were 2 strata, i.e., the 2 color groups.

Although the sampling procedure did not automatically insure an exact 5-percent sample of persons, the Sample Design was unbiased if carried through according to instructions. Generally, for large areas, the deviation from the estimated sample size was found to be quite small. Biases may have arisen, however, when the enumerator failed to follow his listing and sampling instructions exactly.
Ratio Estimation
The statistics based on the 5-percent sample of the 1960 Census returns are estimates that have been developed through the use of a Ratio Estimation procedure. This procedure was carried out for each of the following 44 groups of persons in each of the sample weighting areas: 1

GroupSex, color, and ageRelationship and tenure
 Male white: 
1Under 5 
25 to 13 
314 to 24Head of owner household
414 to 24Head of renter household
514 to 24Not head of household
6-825 to 44Same groups as age group 14 to 24
9-1145 and overSame groups as age group 14 to 24
 Male nonwhite: 
12-22Same groups as male white 
 Female white: 
23-33Same groups as male white 
 Female nonwhite: 
34-44Same groups as male white 


The sample weighting areas were defined as those areas within a State consisting of central cities of Urbanized Areas, the remaining portion of Urbanized Areas not in central cities, urban places not in Urbanized Areas, or rural areas.

For each of the groups, the ratio of the complete count to the sample count of the population in the group was determined. Each specific sample person in the group was assigned an integral weight so that the sum of the weights would equal the complete count for the group. For example, if the ratio for a group was 20.1, one-tenth of the persons (selected at random) within the group were assigned a weight of 21, and the remaining nine-tenths a weight of 20. The use of such a combination of integral weights rather than a single fractional weight was adopted to avoid the complications Involved In rounding in the final tables. In order to Increase the reliability, where there were fewer than 275 persons in the complete count in a group, or where the resulting weight was over 80, groups were combined in a specific order to satisfy both of these conditions.

These ratio estimates reduce the component of sampling error arising from the variation in the size of household and achieve some of the gains of stratification in the selection of the sample, with the strata being the groups for which separate ratio estimates are computed. The net effect is a reduction in the sampling error and bias of most statistics below what would be obtained by weighting the results of the 5-percent sample by a uniform factor of twenty. The reduction in sampling error will be trivial for some items and substantial for others.




©2024 Social Explorer. All rights reserved.