Propensity score adjustment as a weighting scheme for volunteer panel web surveys

By Sunghee Lee. 2006

207 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f8a5b29054d189a6ba9ccc2676555344eb391c60

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

An evaluation of the weighting procedures for an online access panel survey (2008, methodology): “…so that an equal distribution is obtained of the regression-used characteristics, 1 Aside from demographic variables, ‘webographic’ or lifestyle variables may be used (cf. Schonlau et al. 2007). both in the online panel and another, more traditional survey sample (Lee 2006; Schonlau et al. 2006).”
International handbook of survey methodology. (2008, background): “Recently, propensity score adjustment has been suggested to reduce the biases due to noncoverage, self-selection, and nonresponse (Lee, 2006).”
Estimation for Volunteer Panel Web Surveys Using Propensity Score Adjustment and Calibration Adjustment (2009, methodology): “This echoes findings in Lee (2004).”
Sampling weight adjustments in partial least squares structural equation modeling: guidelines and illustrations (2020, background): “Oh & Scheuren, 1983), linear weighting (e.g. Deville et al., 1993), and propensity score adjustment (e.g. Lee, 2006), all of which consider auxiliary information when adjusting sampling unit weights, have been proposed.”
Doubly Robust Inference With Nonprobability Survey Samples (2018, methodology): “response variable y is not part of the dataset for the reference sample. Existing methods for estimating the propensity scores do not provide valid results. The approaches described in Rivers (2007), Lee (2006), Lee and Valliant (2009) and Brick (2015) attempt to estimate ˜πA i = P(R˜i = 1 | xi), wh”