Home > Publications . Search All . Browse All . Country . Browse PSC Pubs . PSC Report Series

PSC In The News

RSS Feed icon

Weir's 2009 report on NFL brain injuries got more attention than neurological findings published in 2005

Edin and Shaefer's book a call to action for Americans to deal with poverty

Weir says pain may underlie rise in suicide and substance-related deaths among white middle-aged Americans


MCubed opens for new round of seed funding, November 4-18

PSC News, fall 2015 now available

Barbara Anderson appointed chair of Census Scientific Advisory Committee

John Knodel honored by Thailand's Chulalongkorn University

Next Brown Bag

Monday, Dec 7 at noon, 6050 ISR-Thompson
Daniel Eisenberg, "Healthy Minds Network: Mental Health among College-Age Populations"

Measurement Error, Unit Nonresponse, and Self-Reports of Abortion Experiences

Archived Abstract of Former PSC Researcher

Peytchev, Andy, Emilia Peytcheva, and Robert M. Groves. 2010. "Measurement Error, Unit Nonresponse, and Self-Reports of Abortion Experiences." Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(2): 319-327.

Survey designs for producing population prevalence estimates, such as abortion rates, need to consider multiple sources of error. Abortion prevalence has been found to suffer from underreporting. Abortion rates can also be underestimated due to unit nonresponse. However, it is when these two phenomena are linked that it becomes a particularly critical problem for both researchers interested in studying abortion rates and survey research practitioners. For substantive researchers, results may depend on the mix of these survey errors, in unexpected ways. For survey methodologists, decreasing one source of error may lead to greater bias in estimates by increasing the influence of another source. Identifying common causes can inform when to expect differences in rates due to the mix of nonresponse and measurement error, while helping practitioners design surveys that reduce both sources of error. This article addresses both nonresponse and measurement error in abortion estimates. We found that those with a lower likelihood to participate in the survey were also more likely to underreport such experiences. We interpret both nonresponse and measurement error as stemming from a common cause: the likely social stigma that reporting of these experiences poses to individuals. Although these results show that naïve increasing of response rates may lead to greater bias in survey estimates, we also find limited evidence that some survey design changes can reduce the link between nonresponse and measurement error. This finding is worthy of replication for practitioners in order to break the link between these sources of error.

DOI:10.1093/poq/nfq002 (Full Text)


Country of focus: United States of America.

Browse | Search : All Pubs | Next