SHARE THE ARTICLE ON
Gathering information tests in survey research isn’t shaded in high contrast all the time. Now and again, individuals from your research populace might be under-addressed, which prompts what is known as undercoverage bias.
Undercoverage bias is normal in survey research. In the same way as other different entanglements in survey research undercoverage bias can immensely change your review results and influence the legitimacy of your research.
While collecting data from your sample population, you cannot tell how genuine it is and whether it is influenced by the researcher or not. When they’re a lot of other sampling biases out there happening to the research data, we are going to discuss the one commonly encountered bias in this article.
Undercoverage bias refers to a type of sampling bias that occurs when a piece of information from your sample responses goes missing or uncovered in the results. This often happens when a large significant entity goes unselected or has zero chance of getting in your representing sample.
For example, a researcher wants to know about the effects of a certain drug on diabetic patients.
There are going to be new patients who have started using the drug and patients that have already been using the drug for years. Not representing any of those groups in your research is going to significantly alter your results, as both their experiences are crucial for the research to accurately determine the effect of the drug on diabetic patients.
And the whole point of conducting research is to arrive at accurate conclusions right? Well, the undercoverage bias work just against that.
Wondering what will be the cost of conducting survey research using Voxco?
It is important to say that whenever any undercoverage bias occurs in your research, it is not always the researcher’s fault. There are going to be certain things that cause it that is beyond the researcher’s control.
We are covering this section where we help you understand common causes of undercoverage bias, so you can identify them easily:
The most commonly made mistake while selecting the samples is choosing them according to the researcher’s convenience. A researcher might interact with only those subjects which he finds are easily available or easy to interact with.
It is sometimes referred to as non-probability sampling, the reason being it only includes the data that was easily accessible. Such samples selected have a high risk of causing undercoverage bias, due to their unrepresentativeness towards the target population.
This sampling technique has a chance of having information gaps, further leading to inaccurate results.
Another loophole caused by the researcher can be his half-cooked or no cooked at all knowledge of the target population. This happens when the person who is supposed to handle the sampling process, doesn’t have a good idea about what exactly he is sampling for, or who are the potential samples to the research.
You need to know all the information about WHO to gather your data from and HOW.
Sometimes, your data comes from people who are going to get paid for it. And when ‘cost’ enters the research, it brings certain limitations with it. Lack of resources for that matter is the most common reason for such bias.
Sponsorships, grants, investments matter a lot especially when your data is coming from a place that requires enough funds for it.
Sometimes, the way your survey is designed can push the respondents away. The way you use your language, channels, questions and design, matters a lot when it comes to this cause of undercoverage bias.
Pay attention to how you are outsourcing your survey. Like if it is for a younger population, distributing them over social media platforms is a good idea. But doing the same for old age people, well not so much. Try using an email channel or even paper-pen format for the old age group, and you will have a better chance at getting your information from them.
Research cannot keep going forever right? Well, it is meant to find a solution or a conclusion so it needs to be done within certain time limits. This is a reason enough for the researcher to not be able to cover all the potential and significant population samples.
In such cases, when the time starts to run out, the researcher needs to be ok with what he has and end up drawing results. To solve this hassle, make sure to plan this schedule beforehand and start a background process to interact with the population.
Let us take a look at how actually this undercover bias looks in real-life scenarios:
Say we made people cast their votes through online ballots to make the process easy. The following people are going to miss out on this survey process:
This method is going to form a vast gap in the data that was gathered to elect personnel since a significant part of the data is basically missing.
Let’s assume a researcher wants to count the total number of luxury cars in the city. He then chooses a popular busy road to check the passing cars. In his count, he is going to miss the following luxury cars:
A researcher decides to study how many people work in IT. So he decides to go to an IT park and survey the workers working there. But the people he does not survey are:
This can be a good example of convenient sampling.
Explore Features in details
Need a map of our platform? Browse through all that we have to offer
Undercoverage bias frequently happens because of convenience examining. To dispose of (or if nothing else limits) the impacts of undercoverage bias, a superior type of testing is utilizing a straightforward arbitrary example.
In this kind of test, each individual from a populace has an equivalent possibility of being chosen to be in the example.
The advantage of this approach is that straightforward irregular examples are typically illustrative of the populace we’re keen on since each part has an equivalent possibility of being remembered for the example.
Whenever we utilize this methodology rather than convenience examining, we can be more certain about our capacity to extrapolate the discoveries from the example to the bigger populace since almost certainly, individuals from each (or virtually every) bunch in the populace are remembered for the example.
Auto Dialer vs Predictive Dialer: Know the Difference SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Table of Contents The average benchmark for First Call Resolution is 70%. This
Power Dialer vs Predictive Dialer: Which Suits Your Needs? SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Table of Contents Dialing our friend’s and family’s numbers to make a
Custom Market Research: Everything you need to Know SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Table of Contents A startup or a brand entering a new market often