Affiliation:
1. Institute for Social Research , University of Michigan , 426 Thompson St., Ann Arbor, MI 48104, U.S.A.
Abstract
Abstract
Respondent driven sampling (RDS) is a sampling method designed for hard-to-sample groups with strong social ties. RDS starts with a small number of arbitrarily selected participants (“seeds”). Seeds are issued recruitment coupons, which are used to recruit from their social networks. Waves of recruitment and data collection continue until reaching a sufficient sample size. Under the assumptions of random recruitment, with-replacement sampling, and a sufficient number of waves, the probability of selection for each participant converges to be proportional to their network size. With recruitment noncooperation, however, recruitment can end abruptly, causing operational difficulties with unstable sample sizes. Noncooperation may void the recruitment Markovian assumptions, leading to selection bias. Here, we consider two RDS studies: one targeting Korean immigrants in Los Angeles and in Michigan; and another study targeting persons who inject drugs in Southeast Michigan. We explore predictors of coupon redemption, associations between recruiter and recruits, and details within recruitment dynamics. While no consistent predictors of noncooperation were found, there was evidence that coupon redemption of targeted recruits was more common among those who shared social bonds with their recruiters, suggesting that noncooperation is more likely to be a feature of recruits not cooperating, rather than recruiters failing to distribute coupons.
Reference39 articles.
1. Abramovitz, D., E.M. Volz, S.A. Strathdee, T.L. Patterson, A. Vera, and S.D. Frost. 2009. “Using Respondent Driven Sampling in a hidden Population at Risk of HIV Infection: Who Do HIV-positive Recruiters Recruit?” Sexually Transmitted Diseases 36(12): 750–756. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181b0f311.
2. American Association for Public Opinion Research. 2016. Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. 9th edition. AAPOR. Available at: https://www.aapor.org/AAPOR_Main/media/publications/Standard-Definitions20169theditionfinal.pdf (accessed September 2019).
3. Bostwick, W.B., T.L. Hughes, and B. Everett. 2015. “Health behavior, status, and outcomes among a community-based sample of lesbian and bisexual women.” LGBT Health 2(2): 121–126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2014.0074.
4. CDC. 2015. National HIV Behavioral Surveillance: Injection Drug Use – Round 4 (NHBS-IDU4): Operations Manual. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/statistics/systems/nhbs/NHBS-IDU4-Operations-Manual-2015.pdf (accessed April 2018).
5. Gile, K.J. and M.S. Handcock. 2010. “Respondent-driven sampling: an assessment of current methodology.” Sociological Methodology 40(1): 286 – 327. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9531.2010.01223.x.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献