The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On the Validity of Inferences from Non-random Sample
Abstract
SUMMARY Random sampling schemes satisfy the conditions for ignoring the selection mechanism in a model-based approach to inference in an observational study, such as a sample survey. In many studies non-random sampling is employed. Conditions for ignoring non-random selection mechanisms are examined. Particular attention is paid to post- statification and to quota sampling. Randomization, whether in the application of treatments to experimental material or in the selection of units to be observed in a sample survey, is one of the most important contributions of statistics to science. The arguments for randomization are twofold. The first, and most important for science, is that randomization eliminates personal choice and hence eliminates the possibility of subjective selection bias. The second is that the randomization distribution provides a basis for statistical inference. The question for scientists is whether such statistical inferences are relevant for scientific inference. In most of applied science any uncertainty in nature is represented by a stochastic model of the phenomenon under study. The problems of statistical inference are then the problems of testing the fit of alternative models and of making inferences about the parameters of a given model. Even when randomization is employed the randomization distribution plays no direct role in this type of statistical inference. However, the selection of the units to be studied can affect
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
RUBIN, D. B. (1976) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/63.3.581 · Cited by 9,925
Cited by
Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection
Tongco, M. D. C. (2007) · Ethnobotany Research and Applications · doi:10.17348/era.5.0.147-158 · Cited by 2,597
The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done?
Nulty, D. D. (2008) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930701293231 · Cited by 2,581
Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys
Groves, R. M. (2006) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfl033 · Cited by 2,420
Environmental Impact Assessment: "Pseudoreplication" in Time?
Stewart-Oaten, A., Murdoch, W. W., & Parker, K. R. (1986) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1939815 · Cited by 1,331
Etikan, I. (2017) · Biometrics & Biostatistics International Journal · doi:10.15406/bbij.2017.05.00149 · Cited by 1,258
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, T. M. F.
- Venue
- Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General)
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1983
- Volume
- 146
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 394
- ISSN
- 0035-9238 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2795712055
- Cited by
- 211
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On the Validity of Inferences from Non-random Sample. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2981454
- The paper
- Smith, T. M. F. (1983). On the Validity of Inferences from Non-random Sample. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General). https://doi.org/10.2307/2981454
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.