Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Freedman, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Wachter, K. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Freedman, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Wachter, K. W.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Planning for the Census in the Year 2000

David A. Freedman

University of California, Berkeley

Kenneth W. Wachter

University of California, Berkeley

Considering the difficulties, the Census Bureau does a remarkably good job at counting people. There are two current techniques for evaluating or adjusting the census: (a) demographic analysis uses administrative records to make independent population estimates, which can be compared to census counts; (b) datafrom an independent sample survey can be used to estimate population coverage. If there is a large undercount, these techniques may be accurate enough for adjustment. With a small undercount, it is unlikely that current adjustment methodologies can improve on the census; instead, adjustment could easily degrade the accuracy of the data. This article reviews plans for Census 2000, including proposals for adjustment, in the light of past experience.

Evaluation Review, Vol. 20, No. 4, 355-377 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9602000401
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?