|Page tools: Print Page RSS Search this Product|
Individual Income (weekly)
On this page:
Applicable to: Persons aged 15 years and over
01. Negative income
02. Nil income
03. $1-$149 ($1-$7,799)
04. $150-$249 ($7,800-$12,999)
05. $250-$399 ($13,000-$20,799)
06. $400-$599 ($20,800-$31,199)
07. $600-$799 ($31,200-$41,599)
08. $800-$999 ($41,600-$51,999)
09. $1,000-$1,299 ($52,000-$67,599)
10. $1,300-$1,599 ($67,600-$83,199)
11. $1,600-$1,999 ($83,200-$103,999)
12. $2,000 or more ($104,000 or more)
&& Not stated
@@ Not applicable
VV Overseas visitor
Total number of categories: 15
More Detailed DescriptionQuality Statement - Individual Income (weekly) (INCP)
There are many aspects which can affect the quality of Census data; the following information should be considered when viewing data on Individual Income (weekly) (INCP).
This data was captured automatically from check box responses on the form so the risk of processing error is minimal. Sample checks of the data are undertaken to ensure an acceptable level of quality.
The non-response rate for 2006 was 8.9% compared with 7.6% for 2001. Part of this non-response is attributable to the 4.2% of persons (aged 15 years and over) in dwellings which were occupied on Census Night but did not return a completed form. In these cases persons are imputed into these dwellings together with some demographic characteristics. However the values for Individual Income (weekly) (INCP) remain not stated. In 2001, 2.1% of persons were imputed into dwellings for which no form was received.
In a small proportion of cases (testing has indicated that this is under 4%), respondents provided an incorrect number of responses (for INCP, respondents are asked to only mark one response). In these cases responses are accepted in the order they appear on the form and the extra responses are rejected.
For an analysis of the issues associated with collecting income data via a Census, including comparisons with other data sources, refer to Census Paper 03/04 - Income (cat. no. 2936.0) which was conducted on the 2001 Census data. A similar study may be conducted for 2006.
The ABS aims to produce high quality data from the Census. To achieve this, extensive effort is put into Census form design, collection procedures, and processing procedures.
There are four principal sources of error in Census data: respondent error, processing error, partial response and undercount. Quality management of the Census program aims to reduce error as much as possible, and to provide a measure of the remaining error to data users, to allow them to use the data in an informed way.
When completing their Census form, some people do not answer all the questions which apply to them. In these instances, a 'not stated' code is allocated during processing, with the exception of non-response to age, sex, marital status and place of usual residence. These variables are needed for population estimates, so they are imputed using other information on the Census form, as well as information from the previous Census.
The processing of information from Census forms is now mostly automated, using scanning, Intelligent Character Recognition and other automatic processes. Quality assurance procedures are used during Census processing to ensure processing errors are kept at an acceptable level. Sample checking is undertaken during coding operations, and corrections are made where necessary.
The Census form may be completed by one household member on behalf of others. Incorrect answers can be introduced to the Census form if the respondent does not understand the question or does not know the correct information about other household members. Many of these errors remain in the final data.
More detailed information on data quality is available in the 2006 Census Dictionary (cat. no. 2901.0), in the section titled Managing Census Quality.