Probability Sampling

A probability sampling method is any method of sampling that utilizes

some form of random selection. In order to have a random selection
method, you must set up some process or procedure that assures that the
different units in your population have equal probabilities of being
chosen. Humans have long practiced various forms of random selection,
such as picking a name out of a hat, or choosing the short straw. These
days, we tend to use computers as the mechanism for generating random
numbers as the basis for random selection.

Some Definitions
Before I can explain the various probability methods we have to define
some basic terms. These are:

 N = the number of cases in the sampling frame

 n = the number of cases in the sample
 NCn = the number of combinations (subsets) of n from N
 f = n/N = the sampling fraction

That's it. With those terms defined we can begin to define the different
probability sampling methods.

Simple Random Sampling

The simplest form of random sampling is called simple random
sampling. Pretty tricky, huh? Here's the quick description of simple
random sampling:

 Objective: To select n units out of N such that each NCn has an

equal chance of being selected.
 Procedure: Use a table of random numbers, a computer random
number generator, or a mechanical device to select the sample.
A somewhat stilted, if accurate, definition. Let's see if we can make it a
little more real. How do
we select a simple
random sample? Let's
assume that we are doing
some research with a
small service agency that
wishes to assess client's
views of quality of service over the past year. First, we have to get the
sampling frame organized. To accomplish this, we'll go through agency
records to identify every client over the past 12 months. If we're lucky,
the agency has good accurate computerized records and can quickly
produce such a list. Then, we have to actually draw the sample. Decide
on the number of clients you would like to have in the final sample. For
the sake of the example, let's say you want to select 100 clients to survey
and that there were 1000 clients over the past 12 months. Then, the
sampling fraction is f = n/N = 100/1000 = .10 or 10%. Now, to actually
draw the sample, you have several options. You could print off the list of
1000 clients, tear then into separate strips, put the strips in a hat, mix
them up real good, close your eyes and pull out the first 100. But this
mechanical procedure would be tedious and the quality of the sample
would depend on how thoroughly you mixed them up and how randomly
you reached in. Perhaps a better procedure would be to use the kind of
ball machine that is popular with many of the state lotteries. You would
need three sets of balls numbered 0 to 9, one set for each of the digits
from 000 to 999 (if we select 000 we'll call that 1000). Number the list
of names from 1 to 1000 and then use the ball machine to select the three
digits that selects each person. The obvious disadvantage here is that you
need to get the ball machines. (Where do they make those things,
anyway? Is there a ball machine industry?).

Neither of these mechanical procedures is very feasible and, with the

development of inexpensive computers there is a much easier way.
Here's a simple procedure that's especially useful if you have the names
of the clients already on the computer. Many computer programs can
generate a series of random numbers. Let's assume you can copy and
paste the list of client names into a column in an EXCEL spreadsheet.
Then, in the column right next to it paste the function =RAND() which
is EXCEL's way of putting a random number between 0 and 1 in the
cells. Then, sort both columns -- the list of names and the random
number -- by the random numbers. This rearranges the list in random
order from the lowest to the highest random number. Then, all you have
to do is take the first hundred names in this sorted list. pretty simple.
You could probably accomplish the whole thing in under a minute.

Simple random sampling is simple to accomplish and is easy to explain

to others. Because simple random sampling is a fair way to select a
sample, it is reasonable to generalize the results from the sample back to
the population. Simple random sampling is not the most statistically
efficient method of sampling and you may, just because of the luck of
the draw, not get good representation of subgroups in a population. To
deal with these issues, we have to turn to other sampling methods.

Stratified Random Sampling

Stratified Random Sampling, also sometimes called proportional or
quota random sampling, involves dividing your population into
homogeneous subgroups and then taking a simple random sample in
each subgroup. In more formal terms:

Objective: Divide the population into non-overlapping groups (i.e.,

strata) N1, N2, N3, ... Ni, such that N1 + N2 + N3 + ... + Ni = N. Then do a
simple random sample of f = n/N in each strata.

There are several major reasons why you might prefer stratified
sampling over simple random sampling. First, it assures that you will be
able to represent not only the overall population, but also key subgroups
of the population, especially small minority groups. If you want to be
able to talk about subgroups, this may be the only way to effectively
assure you'll be able to. If the subgroup is extremely small, you can use
different sampling fractions (f) within the different strata to randomly
over-sample the small group (although you'll then have to weight the
within-group estimates using the sampling fraction whenever you want
overall population estimates). When we use the same sampling fraction
within strata we are conducting proportionate stratified random
sampling. When we use different sampling fractions in the strata, we call
this disproportionate stratified random sampling. Second, stratified
random sampling will generally have more statistical precision than
simple random sampling. This will only be true if the strata or groups
are homogeneous. If they are, we expect that the variability within-
groups is lower than the variability for the population as a whole.
Stratified sampling capitalizes on that fact.

For example,
let's say that
the population
of clients for
our agency
can be
divided into
three groups:
Caucasian,
African-
American and
Hispanic-
American.
Furthermore,
let's assume that both the African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans
are relatively small minorities of the clientele (10% and 5%
respectively). If we just did a simple random sample of n=100 with a
sampling fraction of 10%, we would expect by chance alone that we
would only get 10 and 5 persons from each of our two smaller groups.
And, by chance, we could get fewer than that! If we stratify, we can do
better. First, let's determine how many people we want to have in each
group. Let's say we still want to take a sample of 100 from the
population of 1000 clients over the past year. But we think that in order
to say anything about subgroups we will need at least 25 cases in each
group. So, let's sample 50 Caucasians, 25 African-Americans, and 25
Hispanic-Americans. We know that 10% of the population, or 100
clients, are African-American. If we randomly sample 25 of these, we
have a within-stratum sampling fraction of 25/100 = 25%. Similarly, we
know that 5% or 50 clients are Hispanic-American. So our within-
stratum sampling fraction will be 25/50 = 50%. Finally, by subtraction
we know that there are 850 Caucasian clients. Our within-stratum
sampling fraction for them is 50/850 = about 5.88%. Because the groups
are more homogeneous within-group than across the population as a
whole, we can expect greater statistical precision (less variance). And,
because we stratified, we know we will have enough cases from each
group to make meaningful subgroup inferences.

Systematic Random Sampling

Here are the steps you need to follow in order to achieve a systematic
random sample:

 number the units in the population from 1 to N

 decide on the n (sample size) that you want or need
 k = N/n = the interval size
 randoml
y select
an
integer
between
1 to k
 then
take
every
kth unit

All of this
will be much
clearer with an example. Let's assume that we have a population that
only has N=100 people in it and that you want to take a sample of n=20.
To use systematic sampling, the population must be listed in a random
order. The sampling fraction would be f = 20/100 = 20%. in this case,
the interval size, k, is equal to N/n = 100/20 = 5. Now, select a random
integer from 1 to 5. In our example, imagine that you chose 4. Now, to
select the sample, start with the 4th unit in the list and take every k-th
unit (every 5th, because k=5). You would be sampling units 4, 9, 14, 19,
and so on to 100 and you would wind up with 20 units in your sample.

For this to work, it is essential that the units in the population are
randomly ordered, at least with respect to the characteristics you are
measuring. Why would you ever want to use systematic random
sampling? For one thing, it is fairly easy to do. You only have to select a
single random number to start things off. It may also be more precise
than simple random sampling. Finally, in some situations there is simply
no easier way to do random sampling. For instance, I once had to do a
study that involved sampling from all the books in a library. Once
selected, I would have to go to the shelf, locate the book, and record
when it last circulated. I knew that I had a fairly good sampling frame in
the form of the shelf list (which is a card catalog where the entries are
arranged in the order they occur on the shelf). To do a simple random
sample, I could have estimated the total number of books and generated
random numbers to draw the sample; but how would I find book
#74,329 easily if that is the number I selected? I couldn't very well count
the cards until I came to 74,329! Stratifying wouldn't solve that problem
either. For instance, I could have stratified by card catalog drawer and
drawn a simple random sample within each drawer. But I'd still be stuck
counting cards. Instead, I did a systematic random sample. I estimated
the number of books in the entire collection. Let's imagine it was
100,000. I decided that I wanted to take a sample of 1000 for a sampling
fraction of 1000/100,000 = 1%. To get the sampling interval k, I divided
N/n = 100,000/1000 = 100. Then I selected a random integer between 1
and 100. Let's say I got 57. Next I did a little side study to determine
how thick a thousand cards are in the card catalog (taking into account
the varying ages of the cards). Let's say that on average I found that two
cards that were separated by 100 cards were about .75 inches apart in the
catalog drawer. That information gave me everything I needed to draw
the sample. I counted to the 57th by hand and recorded the book
information. Then, I took a compass. (Remember those from your high-
school math class? They're the funny little metal instruments with a
sharp pin on one end and a pencil on the other that you used to draw
circles in geometry class.) Then I set the compass at .75", stuck the pin
end in at the 57th card and pointed with the pencil end to the next card
(approximately 100 books away). In this way, I approximated selecting
the 157th, 257th, 357th, and so on. I was able to accomplish the entire
selection procedure in very little time using this systematic random
sampling approach. I'd probably still be there counting cards if I'd tried
another random sampling method. (Okay, so I have no life. I got
compensated nicely, I don't mind saying, for coming up with this
scheme.)

Cluster (Area) Random Sampling

The problem with random sampling methods when we have to sample a
population that's disbursed across a wide geographic region is that you
will have to cover a lot of ground geographically in order to get to each
of the units you sampled. Imagine taking a simple random sample of all
the residents of New York State in order to conduct personal interviews.
By the luck of the draw you will wind up with respondents who come
from all over the state. Your interviewers are going to have a lot of
traveling to do. It is for precisely this problem that cluster or area
random sampling was invented.

In cluster sampling, we follow these steps:

 divide population into clusters (usually along geographic

boundaries)
 randomly sample clusters
 measure all units within sampled clusters
For instance,
in the figure
we see a map
of the
counties in
New York
State. Let's
say that we
have to do a
survey of
town
governments
that will
require us
going to the
towns
personally. If we do a simple random sample state-wide we'll have to
cover the entire state geographically. Instead, we decide to do a cluster
sampling of five counties (marked in red in the figure). Once these are
selected, we go to every town government in the five areas. Clearly this
strategy will help us to economize on our mileage. Cluster or area
sampling, then, is useful in situations like this, and is done primarily for
efficiency of administration. Note also, that we probably don't have to
worry about using this approach if we are conducting a mail or
telephone survey because it doesn't matter as much (or cost more or raise
inefficiency) where we call or send letters to.

Multi-Stage Sampling
The four methods we've covered so far -- simple, stratified, systematic
and cluster -- are the simplest random sampling strategies. In most real
applied social research, we would use sampling methods that are
considerably more complex than these simple variations. The most
important principle here is that we can combine the simple methods
described earlier in a variety of useful ways that help us address our
sampling needs in the most efficient and effective manner possible.
When we combine sampling methods, we call this multi-stage
sampling.

For example, consider the idea of sampling New York State residents for
face-to-face interviews. Clearly we would want to do some type of
cluster sampling as the first stage of the process. We might sample
townships or census tracts throughout the state. But in cluster sampling
we would then go on to measure everyone in the clusters we select. Even
if we are sampling census tracts we may not be able to measure
everyone who is in the census tract. So, we might set up a stratified
sampling process within the clusters. In this case, we would have a two-
stage sampling process with stratified samples within cluster samples.
Or, consider the problem of sampling students in grade schools. We
might begin with a national sample of school districts stratified by
economics and educational level. Within selected districts, we might do
a simple random sample of schools. Within schools, we might do a
simple random sample of classes or grades. And, within classes, we
might even do a simple random sample of students. In this case, we have
three or four stages in the sampling process and we use both stratified
and simple random sampling. By combining different sampling methods
we are able to achieve a rich variety of probabilistic sampling methods
that can be used in a wide range of social research contexts.