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

the relevant age range in the household for the respondent with the zero count was
closer to the screener age count, and the nonzero count exceeded the screener
count of children.
In situations where a respondent with zero count had a roster more closely resembling
that of the screener, but the screener included a household member within the relevant
age range who was not part of the immediate family, neither the nonzero count of
children with parent(s) in the household nor the screener count of children within the
relevant age range could be used––a different count had to be used. Two strategies
were employed:
• For the respondent with a nonzero count of children with parent(s) in the
household, the nonzero count was the same as the count of children within the
relevant age range in the household, but it exceeded the number-of-children count
for the zero-count respondent. However, the count of children within the relevant
age range for the zero-count respondent, which was not zero, was closer to the
screener age count than the nonzero-count respondent.
• If the count of children within the relevant age range for the zero-count
respondent was the same as the nonzero count of children with parent(s) in the
household, the number-of-children count for the zero-count respondent could not
be used, since the nonzero count included a household member that was not in the
appropriate age range at the time of screening. One less than the nonzero count of
children with parent(s) in the household was therefore chosen as the final count.
11. Other situations with a zero and nonzero count did not necessarily mean that the
relationship was something other than parent-child or sibling-sibling. This was
usually due to one pair member having missing relationship codes for the roster
member that would have been identified as a parent (i.e., relationship codes for roster
members in a parental age range). If the count for the pair member with the entirely
good roster was equal to the number within the relevant child age range for the pair
member with bad relationship codes in the roster, the nonzero count was selected.
12. The two counts of children with parent(s) in the household might have disagreed
where both were nonzero and both exceeded the screener count of children within the
relevant age range. For the screener count to be chosen as the final household count
of children with parent(s) in the household, the following conditions had to be met:
• The pair member’s household rosters had to have different numbers of children
within the relevant age range,
• The pair relationship could be neither parent-child nor sibling-sibling with a zero
screener count of children within the relevant age range(s),
• The total number within the screener roster (where the minimum age was 12
years) had to be at least two, and
S-9