Comparison of quota sampling and stratified random sampling

Rufai Iliyasu, I. Etikan
{"title":"Comparison of quota sampling and stratified random sampling","authors":"Rufai Iliyasu, I. Etikan","doi":"10.15406/bbij.2021.10.00326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The possibility that researchers should be able to obtain data from all cases is questionable. There is a need; therefore, this article provides a probability and non-probability sampling. In this paper we studied the differences and similarities of the two with approach that is more of fritter away time, cost sufficient with energy required throughout the sample observed. The pair shows the differences and similarities between them, different articles were reviewed to compare the two. Quota sampling and Stratified sampling are close to each other. Both require the division into groups of the target population. The main goal of both methods is to select a representative sample and facilitate sub-group research. There are major variations, however. Stratified sampling uses simple random sampling when the categories are generated; sampling of the quota uses sampling of availability. For stratified sampling, a sampling frame is necessary, but not needed for quota sampling. More specifically, stratified sampling is a method of probability sampling which enables the calculation of the sampling error. For quota samples, this is not possible. Quota sampling is therefore primarily used by market analysts rather than stratified sampling, as it is mostly cost-effective and easy to conduct and has the appealing equity of satisfying population reach. However, it disguises potentially significant bias.","PeriodicalId":90455,"journal":{"name":"Biometrics & biostatistics international journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"42","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biometrics & biostatistics international journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15406/bbij.2021.10.00326","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42

Abstract

The possibility that researchers should be able to obtain data from all cases is questionable. There is a need; therefore, this article provides a probability and non-probability sampling. In this paper we studied the differences and similarities of the two with approach that is more of fritter away time, cost sufficient with energy required throughout the sample observed. The pair shows the differences and similarities between them, different articles were reviewed to compare the two. Quota sampling and Stratified sampling are close to each other. Both require the division into groups of the target population. The main goal of both methods is to select a representative sample and facilitate sub-group research. There are major variations, however. Stratified sampling uses simple random sampling when the categories are generated; sampling of the quota uses sampling of availability. For stratified sampling, a sampling frame is necessary, but not needed for quota sampling. More specifically, stratified sampling is a method of probability sampling which enables the calculation of the sampling error. For quota samples, this is not possible. Quota sampling is therefore primarily used by market analysts rather than stratified sampling, as it is mostly cost-effective and easy to conduct and has the appealing equity of satisfying population reach. However, it disguises potentially significant bias.
定额抽样与分层随机抽样的比较
研究人员能够从所有病例中获取数据的可能性值得怀疑。有需要;因此,本文提供了概率抽样和非概率抽样。在本文中,我们研究了这两种方法的异同之处,这种方法更多地消耗了时间,成本足以在整个观察样本中所需的能量。这对展示了他们之间的异同,对不同的文章进行了回顾比较。配额抽样和分层抽样是非常接近的。两者都需要将目标人群划分为不同的群体。这两种方法的主要目的是选择一个有代表性的样本,并促进子群体研究。然而,有一些主要的变化。分层抽样在生成类别时采用简单随机抽样;配额的抽样使用可用性抽样。对于分层抽样,需要一个采样帧,但对于配额抽样则不需要。更具体地说,分层抽样是一种能够计算抽样误差的概率抽样方法。对于配额样本,这是不可能的。因此,配额抽样主要由市场分析师使用,而不是分层抽样,因为它最具成本效益,易于进行,并且具有满足人口覆盖的吸引力。然而,它掩盖了潜在的重大偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信