21.06.2014 Views

Questionnaire Dwelling Unit-Level and Person Pair-Level Sampling ...

Questionnaire Dwelling Unit-Level and Person Pair-Level Sampling ...

Questionnaire Dwelling Unit-Level and Person Pair-Level Sampling ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

with parent(s) in the household) for the two sides agreed. However, both sides had to<br />

meet the following conditions in order for the final count to be set to one of the sides:<br />

• Either no bad ages with the relevant relationship codes <strong>and</strong> no bad relationship<br />

codes within the relevant age ranges, or the counts of children with parent(s) in<br />

the household were equal to the screener age counts, or a side with good data<br />

indicated siblings within the relevant age range living together in a household<br />

without parents;<br />

• No situations where parents were not identified in the household, but some in the<br />

household had bad relationship codes <strong>and</strong> were old enough to be parents.<br />

• No counts of one child in the relevant child-age range when both members of the<br />

pair were in that range <strong>and</strong> the children were siblings;<br />

• No pairs where the ages of the identified parents did not match, the pair members<br />

were not siblings, <strong>and</strong> both sides had relationship codes signifying "other relative"<br />

or a nonrelative, indicating more than one family unit in the household; <strong>and</strong> 34<br />

• The household size was greater than 1 <strong>and</strong> was nonmissing on both sides.<br />

2. The counts of children with parent(s) in the household might have agreed even<br />

though the above conditions were not met. The final count of children with parent(s)<br />

in the household could still have been set to one of the sides, if any one of the<br />

following was true:<br />

• If the number of children within the relevant age ranges matched across both<br />

rosters <strong>and</strong> the screener <strong>and</strong> (at least) one side had all good age <strong>and</strong> relationship<br />

codes, provided the equal counts did not refer to the same children; 35<br />

• If both sides had a count of zero children with parent(s) in the household, both<br />

had a roster, <strong>and</strong> (at least) one side had all good age <strong>and</strong> relationship codes;<br />

• If both sides had a count of zero children with parent(s) in the household, both<br />

had a roster, <strong>and</strong> the number of respondents who were old enough to be parents in<br />

the household was zero according to the screener; or<br />

• If the counts of children with parent(s) in the household that agreed with each<br />

other equalled or exceeded the count of the number of children from the screener<br />

within the relevant age ranges.<br />

3. The counts of children with parent(s) in the household might have agreed with a value<br />

of 1. If both pair members were children within the relevant age range, <strong>and</strong> both<br />

indicated they had parents even though the children were siblings, then they were not<br />

34 Codes that indicate "other relative" or a nonrelative are 7 (roommate), 8 (child-in-law), 10 (parent-inlaw),<br />

12 (boarder), 13 (other relative), <strong>and</strong> 14 (other nonrelative).<br />

35 This was determined by excluding situations where the ages of the identified parents did not match, the<br />

pair members were not siblings, <strong>and</strong> both sides had relationship codes signifying "other relative" or a nonrelative,<br />

indicating more than one family unit in the household.<br />

S-4

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!