An Evaluation of Persons per Household (PPH) Estimates Generated by the American Community Survey: A Demographic Perspective

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：David A. Swanson (1) David.swanson@ucr.edu
  George C. Hough (2) George.Hough@rice.edu
• 关键词：Housing unit method &#8211 ; Population estimation &#8211 ; Sub ; national
• 刊名：Population Research and Policy Review
• 出版年：2012
• 出版时间：April 2012
• 年：2012
• 卷：31
• 期：2
• 页码：235-266
• 全文大小：870.3 KB
• 参考文献：1. Akkerman, A. (1980). On the relationship between household composition and population age distribution. Population Studies, 34(3), 525–534.
  2. Bai, J. (1997). Estimation of a change point in multiple regression models. Review of Economics and Statistics, 79, 551–563.
  3. Bai, J., & Perron, P. (2003). Computation and analysis of multiple structural change models. Journal of Applied Economics, 18, 1–22.
  4. Bass, F., & Leone, R. (1983). Temporal aggregation, the data interval bias, and empirical estimation of bimonthly relations from annual data. Management Science, 29, 1–11.
  5. Blumerman, L., & Vidal, P. (2009). Uses of population and income statistics in federal funds distribution—with a focus on Census Bureau Data. Governments Division Report Series (Research Report #2009-1). Suitland, MD: US Census Bureau.
  6. Blundell, R., & Stoker, T. (2005). Heterogeneity and aggregation. Journal of Economic Literature, 43, 347–391.
  7. Bongaarts, J. (1983). The formal demography of families and households: An overview. IUSSP Newsletter, No. 17. Liege: International Union for the Scientific Study of Population.
  8. Breidt, F. J. (2006). Controlling the American Community Survey to intercensal population estimates. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 31, 253–270.
  9. Bryan, T. (2004). Population estimates. In J. Siegel & D. Swanson (Eds.), The methods and materials of demography (2nd ed., pp. 523–560). New York: Elsevier Academic Press.
  10. Burch, T. (1967). The size and structure of families: A comparative analysis of census data. American Sociological Review, 32(3), 347–363.
  11. Burch, T. (1970). Some demographic determinants of average household size: An analytic approach. Demography, 7(1), 61–69.
  12. Burch, T., Halli, S., Madan, A., Thomas, K., & Wai, L. (1987). Measures of household composition and headship based on aggregate routine census data. In J. Bongaarts, T. Burch, & K. Wachter (Eds.), Family demography: Methods and their application (pp. 19–33). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  13. Byerly, E. (1990). State and local agencies preparing population and housing estimates. Current Population Reports, Series P-25, No. 1063. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  14. California Department of Finance. (2010, May). E-1 population estimates for cities, counties and the state with annual percent change—January 1, 2009 and 2010. Sacramento, CA. Accessed August 2011, from http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e-1/2009-10/view.php.
  15. Citro, C., & Kalton, G. (Eds.). (2007). Using the American Community Survey: Benefits and challenges. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, National Research Council.
  16. Coale, A. (1965). Estimates of average size of household. In A. Coale, L. Fallers, M. Levy, D. Schneider, & S. Tompkins (Eds.), Aspects of the analysis of family structure (pp. 64–69). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  17. Committee on National Statistics. (1980). Estimating population and income for small areas. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  18. Cork, D., Cohen, M., & King, B. (Eds.). (2004). Reengineering the 2010 census: Risks and challenges. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, National Research Council.
  19. Cork, D., & Voss, P. (Eds.). (2006). Once, only once, and in the right place: Residence rules in the decennial census. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, National Research Council.
  20. Cox, D., & Wermuth, N. (2006). Causality: A statistical view. International Statistical Review, 72(3), 285–305.
  21. Davis, S. T. (1994). Evaluation of postcensal county estimates for the 1980s. Working Paper No. 5. Washington, DC: Population Division, U.S. Bureau of the Census.
  22. De Vos, S., & Palloni, A. (1989). Formal models and methods for the analysis of kinship and household organization. Population Index, 55(2), 174–198.
  23. Devine, J., & Coleman, C. (2003). People might move but housing units don’t: An evaluation of the state and county housing unit estimates. Population Division Working Paper Series No. 71. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed January 2010, from http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0071/twps0071.html.
  24. Fay, R. (2005). Model-assisted estimation for the American Community Survey. In Proceedings of the joint statistical meetings, ASA section on survey research methods (pp. 3016–2023). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.
  25. Fay, R. (2007). Variance reduction for sub-county estimates in the American Community Survey. Paper presented at the spring meeting of the Census Advisory Committee for Professional Associations, Suitland, MD.
  26. Federal Register. (2010). American Community Survey 5-year data product plans. Federal Register 75(181): September 20 (Docket Number 100726309-0311-02). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
  27. Glick, J., Bean, F., & Van Hook, J. (1997). Immigration and changing patterns of extended family household structure in the United States: 1970–1990. Journal of Marriage and Family, 59(1), 177–191.
  28. Goldsmith, H., Jackson, D., & Shambaugh, J. (1982). A social analysis approach. In E. Lee & H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Population estimates: Methods for small area estimates (pp. 169–190). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  29. Griffin, D., & Waite, P. J. (2006). American community survey overview and the role of external evaluations. Population Research and Policy Review, 25, 201–223.
  30. Hill, J. (1990). A general framework for model-based statistics. Biometrika, 77(1), 115–126.
  31. Hodges, K., Wilcox, F., & Poveromo, A. (2002). An evaluation of small area estimates produced by the private sector. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Atlanta, Georgia.
  32. Hoque, M. N. (2010). Estimates of the total populations of counties and places in Texas for July 1, 2009 and January 1, 2010. Office of the State Demographer, Institute for Demographic and Socioeconomic Research, College of Public Policy. San Antonio, TX: The University of Texas at San Antonio. Accessed August 2011, from http://txsdc.utsa.edu/Resources/TPEPP/Estimates/2009/2009_txpopest_method.pdf.
  33. Hough, G., & Swanson, D. A. (1998). Towards an assessment of continuous measurement: A comparison of returns with 1990 census returns for the Portland test site. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 24, 295–308.
  34. Hough, G., & Swanson, D. (2006). An evaluation of the American Community Survey: Results from the Oregon test site. Population Research and Policy Review, 25(3), 257–273.
  35. Hubbard, R., & Bayarri, M. J. (2003). P values are not error probabilities. Technical Report 14-03. Department of Statistics and Operations Research. University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. Accessed March 2010, from http://www.uv.es/sestio/TechRep/tr14-03.pdf.
  36. Iversen, G., & Norpoth, H. (1973). Analysis of variance. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  37. Jiang, J., & Lahiri, P. (2006). Mixed model prediction and small area estimation. Test, 15(1), 1–96.
  38. Kimpel, T., & Lowe, T. (2007). Estimating household size for use in population estimates. Population Estimates and Projections, Research Brief no. 47. Olympia, WA: Washington State Office of Financial Management.
  39. Kirk, R. (1968). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont CA: Brooks.
  40. Kish, L. (1998). Space/time variations and rolling samples. Journal of Official Statistics, 14(1), 31–46.
  41. Korbin, F. (1976). The fall in household size and the rise of the primary individual in the United States. Demography, 13(1), 127–138.
  42. Lewis-Beck, M. S. (1986). Interrupted time series. Chapter 9 in W. D. Berry & M. S. Lewis-Beck (Eds.), New tools for social scientists: Advances and applications in research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  43. Long, J. F. (1993). Postcensal population estimates: States, counties, and places. Working Paper No. 3. Washington, DC: Population Division, U.S. Bureau of the Census.
  44. Lowe, T. (1988). A resurrection: The potential of postal survey data in improving housing unit population estimates for local areas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America., New Orleans, LA.
  45. Lowe, T., & Mohrman, M. (2003). Use of postal delivery data in the population estimate process. Population Estimates and Projections Research Brief No. 18. Olympia, WA: Washington State Office of Financial Management.
  46. Lowe, T., Mohrman, M., & Brunink, D. (2003). Developing postal delivery data for use in population estimates. Population Estimates and Projections Research Brief No. 17. Olympia, WA: Washington State Office of Financial Management.
  47. Lowe, T., Pittenger, D., & Walker, J. (1977). Making the housing unit method work: A progress report. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America, St. Louis, MO.
  48. Moore, W. (1963). Social change. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  49. Multry, M., & Spencer, B. (1993). Accuracy of the 1990 census and undercount adjustments. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 1080–1091.
  50. Murray, M. (1992). Census adjustment and the distribution of federal spending. Demography, 29(3), 319–332.
  51. Myers, D., & Doyle, A. (1990). Age-specific population-per-household ratios: Linking population age structure with housing characteristics. In D. Myers (Ed.), Housing demography: Linking demographic structure and housing markets (pp. 109–130). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
  52. National Research Council. (1980). Estimating population and income of small areas. Washington, DC: National Research Council. National Academies Press.
  53. National Research Council. (1995). Modernizing the U.S. Census. Washington, DC: National Research Council. National Academies Press.
  54. National Research Council. (2003). Statistical issues in allocating funds by formula. Washington, DC: National Research Council. National Academies Press.
  55. Ogburn, W. F. (1922). Social change with respect to culture and original nature. New York: B.W. Huebsch.
  56. Perenger, T. (1998). What is wrong with Bonferroni adjustments? British Medical Journal, 136, 1236–1238.
  57. Purcell, N. J., & Kish, L. (1979). Estimation for small domains. Biometrics, 35, 365–384.
  58. Reamer, A. (2010a, April 19). Budget 2011: More data for metros. The New Republic. Accessed June 2011, from http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-avenue/budget-2011-more-data-metros.
  59. Reamer, A. (2010b). Surveying for dollars: The role of the American Community Survey in the geographic distribution of federal funds. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
  60. Roe, L., Carlson, J., & Swanson, D. (1992). A variation of the housing unit method for estimating the population of small, rural areas: A case study of the local expert procedure. Survey Methodology, 18, 155–163.
  61. Rossana, R., & Seater, J. (1995). Temporal aggregation and economic time series. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 13, 441–451.
  62. Scire, M. (2007). 2010 Census: Population measures are important for federal funding allocations. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives. Publication GAO-08-230T. Washington, DC: General Accountability Office.
  63. Smith, S. (1986). A review and evaluation of the housing unit method of population estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 287–296.
  64. Smith, A. S. (1998). The American Community Survey and intercensal population estimates: Where are the crossroads? Population Division Technical Working Paper No. 31. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
  65. Smith, S., & Cody, S. (1994). Evaluating the housing unit method: A case study of 1990 population estimates in Florida. Journal of the American Planning Association, 60, 209–221.
  66. Smith, S., & Cody, S. (2010). Methodology for producing estimates of total population for cities and counties in Florida: April 1, 2009. Bureau of Economic and Business Research. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida. Accessed August 2011, from http://edr.state.fl.us/Content/populationdemographics/data/Methodology_Estimates.pdf.
  67. Smith, S., & Cody, S. (2011). An evaluation of population estimates in Florida: April 1, 2010. Special Population Reports # 8. Bureau of Business and Economic Research. Gainesville, FL; University of Florida.
  68. Smith, S., & Lewis, B. (1980). Some new techniques for applying the housing unit method of local population estimation. Demography, 17, 323–339.
  69. Smith, S., & Mandell, M. (1984). A comparison of population estimation methods: Housing unit versus component II, ratio correlation, and administrative records. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 282–289.
  70. Smith, S. K., Nogle, J., & Cody, S. (2002). A regression approach to estimating the average number of persons per household. Demography, 39(4), 697–712.
  71. Smith, S. K., Tayman, J., & Swanson, D. A. (2001). Population projections for states and local areas: Methodology and analysis. New York: Kluwer/Plenum Press.
  72. Starsinic, M. (2005). American Community Survey: Improving reliability for small area estimates. In Proceedings of the 2005 joint statistical meetings, ASA section on survey research methods (pp. 2392–3599). Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.
  73. Stigler, S. (1986). The history of statistics: The measurement of uncertainty before 1900. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  74. Swanson, D. A. (1980). Improving accuracy in multiple regression estimates of county populations using principles from causal modeling. Demography, 17(November), 413–427.
  75. Swanson, D. A. (1981). Allocation accuracy in population estimates: An overlooked criterion with fiscal implications. In Small area population estimates, methods and their accuracy and new metropolitan areas definitions and their impact on the private and public sector (pp. 13–21). Series GE-41 No. 7. U.S. Bureau of the Census.
  76. Swanson, D. A. (1982). Change in average household size: 1970–80. In Alaska population overview: 1981. Research and Statistics Division. Juneau, AK: Alaska Department of Labor.
  77. Swanson, D. A. (2004). Advancing methodological knowledge within state and local demography: A case study. Population Research and Policy Review, 23(4), 379–398.
  78. Swanson, D. A. (2010, November 15–19). Perspectives on the American Community Survey. Presented at the 2010 conference of the Latin American Association for Population Studies, Havana, Cuba.
  79. Swanson, D. A., Baker, B., & Van Patten, J. (1983). Municipal population estimation: Practical and conceptual features of the housing unit method. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Pittsburgh, PA.
  80. Swanson, D. A., & Lowe, T. (1980). Changes in household size, 1970–79. In State of Washington population trends, 1979. Population, Enrollment and Economic Studies Division. Olympia, WA: Washington State Office of Financial Management.
  81. Swanson, D. A., Tayman, J., & Barr, C. (2000). A note on the measurement of accuracy for subnational demographic estimates. Demography, 37(May), 193–201.
  82. Toothaker, L. E. (1993). Multiple comparison procedures. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  83. U.S. Census Bureau. (No date 1). Estimates challenge program and results. Accessed August 2011, from http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/challenges.html.
  84. U.S. Census Bureau. (No date 2). Release notes for preliminary vintage 2010 estimates. Accessed November 2011, from http://www.census.gov/popest/topics/methodology/2010-relnotes.pdf.
  85. U.S. Census Bureau. (1978). State and local agencies preparing population estimates and projections: Survey of 1975–76. Current Population Reports, Series P-25, No. 723. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  86. U.S. Census Bureau. (2001a). Meeting 21st century demographic data needs—implementing the American Community Survey: July 2001. Report 1: Demonstrating operational feasibility. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
  87. U.S. Census Bureau. (2001b). The American Community Survey, updated information for America’s Communities, November, 2001 (ACS/01-BLKT).
  88. U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). American Community Survey Operations Plan. Release 1: March 2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
  89. U.S. Census Bureau. (2004a). About the American Community Survey. Accessed January 2010, from http://www.census.gov/CMS/www/acs.htm.
  90. U.S. Census Bureau. (2004b). Meeting 21st century demographic data needs—implementing the American Community Survey. Report 8: Comparisons of the American Community Survey three-year averages with the census sample for a sample of counties and tracts. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
  91. U.S. Census Bureau. (2008). A compass for understanding and using American Community Survey data: What general data users need to know. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
  92. U.S. Census Bureau. (2009a). Design and methodology: American Community Survey (April, 2009, ACS-DM1). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
  93. U.S. Census Bureau. (2009b). A compass for understanding and using American Community Survey data: What researchers need to know. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
  94. U.S. GAO (General Accountability Office). (2006). Federal assistance: Illustrative simulations of using statistical population estimates for reallocating certain federal funding. GAO-06-567. Washington, DC. U.S. Government Accountability Office.
  95. Van Auken, P. M., Hammer, R. B., Voss, P. R., & Veroff, D. L. (2006). The American Community Survey in counties with ‘seasonal’ populations. Population Research and Policy Review, 25, 275–292.
  96. Velkoff, V. (2007). The U.S. Census population estimates program. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association of Public Data Users, Alexandria, VA.
  97. Velkoff, V., & Devine, J. (2009, June 5). Estimates evaluation: E2. Presentation given at the quarterly meeting of the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics, Alexandria, VA. Accessed January 2010, from http://www.copafs.org/VelkoffDevine.pdf.
  98. Walashek, P., & Swanson, D. (2006). The roots of conflicts over US Census counts in the late 20th century and prospects for the 21st century. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 31(34), 185–206.
  99. Washington State Office of Financial Management. (2000). Developing trends in household size for use in population estimates. Population Estimates and Projections Research Brief No. 10. Olympia, WA: Washington State Office of Financial Management.
  100. Wetrogan, S. (2005, June 7). The intercensal population estimates and projections program. Presentation to the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC. Accessed August 2011, from www.mwcog.org/uploads/committee…/vltfVls20050607121524.ppt.
  101. Wetrogan, S. (2007). Evaluating county population estimates using a housing unit based approach. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Demographic Association, Birmingham, AL.
  102. Williams, J. (2010, December 21). The American Community Survey: Development, implementation, and issues for congress. Government Policy. Accessed June, 2011 from http://government-policy.blogspot.com/2010/12/american-community-survey-development.html.
  103. Ziliak, S., & McCloskey, D. (2008). The cult of statistical significance: How the standard error costs us jobs, justice and lives. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
• 作者单位：1. Department of Sociology, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521, USA2. Department of Sociology, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005, USA
• 刊物类别：Humanities, Social Sciences and Law
• 刊物主题：Social Sciences
  Demography
  Economic Geography
  Economic Policy
  Population Economics
  
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1573-7829

文摘

The American Community Survey (ACS) is a U.S. Census Bureau product designed to provide accurate and timely demographic and economic indicators on an annual basis for both large and small geographic areas within the United States. Operational plans call for ACS to serve not only as a substitute for the decennial census long-form, but as a means of providing annual data at the national, state, county, and subcounty levels. In addition to being highly ambitious, this approach represents a major change in how data are collected and interpreted. Two of the major questions facing the ACS are its functionality and usability. This paper explores the latter of these two questions by examining “persons per household (PPH),” a variable of high interest to demographers and others preparing regular post-censal population estimates. The data used in this exploration are taken from 18 of the counties that formed the set of 1999 ACS test sites. The examination proceeds by first comparing 1-year ACS PPH estimates to Census 2010 PPH values along with extrapolated estimates generated using a geometric model based on PPH change between the 1990 and 2000 census counts. Both sets of estimates are then compared to annual 2001–2009 PPH interpolated estimates generated by a geometric model based on PPH from the 2000 census to the 2010 census. The ACS PPH estimates represent what could be called the “statistical perspective” because variations in the estimates of specific variables over time and space are viewed largely by statisticians with an eye toward sample error. The model-based PPH estimates represent a “demographic perspective” because PPH estimates are largely viewed by demographers as varying systematically and changing relatively slowly over time, an orientation stemming from theory and empirical evidence that PPH estimates respond to demographic and related determinants. The comparisons suggest that the ACS PPH estimates exhibit too much “noisy” variation for a given area over time to be usable by demographers and others preparing post-censal population estimates. These findings should be confirmed through further analysis and suggestions are provided for the directions this research could take. We conclude by noting that the statistical and demographic perspectives are not incompatible and that one of the aims of our paper is to encourage the U.S. Census Bureau to consider ways to improve the usability of the 1-year ACS PPH estimates.