Auxiliary information resolution effects on small area estimation in plantation forest inventory

In forest inventory, traditional ground-based resource assessments are often expensive and time-consuming forcing managers to reduce sample sizes to meet budgetary and logistical constraints. Small area estimation (SAE) is a class of statistical estimators that uses a combination of traditional survey data and linearly related auxiliary information to improve estimate precision. These techniques have been shown to improve the precision of stand-level inventory estimates in loblolly pine plantations using lidar height percentiles and thinning status as covariates. In this study, the effects of reduced lidar point-cloud densities and lower digital elevation model (DEM) spatial resolutions were investigated for total planted volume estimates using area-level SAE models. In the managed Piedmont pine plantation conditions evaluated, lower lidar point-cloud densities and DEM spatial resolutions were found to have minimal effects on estimates and precision. The results of this study are promising to those interested in incorporating SAE methods into forest inventory programs.

Methods for Improving Representativeness in a Web Survey on Sexual Assault Among College Students

Many colleges and universities conduct web-based campus climate surveys to understand the prevalence and nature of sexual assault among their students. When designing and fielding a web survey to measure a sensitive topic like sexual assault, methodological decisions, including the length of the field period and the use or amount of an incentive, can affect the representativeness of the respondent sample leading to biased or imprecise estimates. This study uses data from the Campus Climate Survey Validation Study (CCSVS) to assess how the interaction between field period length and survey incentive amount affects nonresponse, sample representativeness, and the precision of survey estimates. Research suggests that using robust incentives gives potential survey respondents a reason to complete the survey beyond their intrinsic motivation to do so. Likewise, extending the field period gives more time to people who may be less intrinsically motivated to complete the survey. Both serve to increase sample size and representativeness, minimize bias, and improve estimate precision. Schools, however, sometimes lack the time and/or resources for both a robust incentive and a lengthy field period, and this study examines the extent to which the potential negative impacts of not using one can be mitigated by the presence of the other. Findings indicate that target response rates can be achieved using a smaller incentive if the field period is lengthy but, even with a lengthy field period, the use of a smaller incentive can result in biased estimates due to a lack of representativeness. Conversely, when a robust incentive is used and weights are developed to adjust for nonresponse, a shorter field period will not have a significant impact on point estimates, but the estimates will be less precise due to fewer respondents participating in the survey.

Hard choices in assessing survival past dams — a comparison of single- and paired-release strategies

Mark–recapture models are widely used to estimate survival of salmon smolts migrating past dams. Paired releases have been used to improve estimate accuracy by removing components of mortality not attributable to the dam. This method is accompanied by reduced precision because (i) sample size is reduced relative to a single, large release; and (ii) variance calculations inflate error. We modeled an idealized system with a single dam to assess trade-offs between accuracy and precision and compared methods using root mean squared error (RMSE). Simulations were run under predefined conditions (dam mortality, background mortality, detection probability, and sample size) to determine scenarios when the paired release was preferable to a single release. We demonstrate that a paired-release design provides a theoretical advantage over a single-release design only at large sample sizes and high probabilities of detection. At release numbers typical of many survival studies, paired release can result in overestimation of dam survival. Failures to meet model assumptions of a paired release may result in further overestimation of dam-related survival. Under most conditions, a single-release strategy was preferable.