6333.0 - Characteristics of Employment, Australia, August 2015 Quality Declaration 
Previous ISSUE Released at 11:30 AM (CANBERRA TIME) 31/08/2016   
   Page tools: Print Print Page Print all pages in this productPrint All RSS Feed RSS Bookmark and Share Search this Product

TECHNICAL NOTE DATA QUALITY

INTRODUCTION

1 Since the estimates in this publication are based on information obtained from occupants of a sample of dwellings, they are subject to sampling variability. That is, they may differ from those estimates that would have been produced if all dwellings had been included in the survey. One measure of the likely difference is given by the standard error (SE), which indicates the extent to which an estimate might have varied by chance because only a sample of dwellings was included. There are about two chances in three (67%) that a sample estimate will differ by less than one SE from the number that would have been obtained if all dwellings had been included, and about 19 chances in 20 (95%) that the difference will be less than two SEs.

2 Another measure of the likely difference is the relative standard error (RSE), which is obtained by expressing the SE as a percentage of the estimate.

    RSE% = (SE/estimate ) x 100

3 RSEs for Characteristics of Employment estimates have been calculated using the Jackknife method of variance estimation. This process involves the calculation of 30 'replicate' estimates based on 30 different sub-samples of the original sample. The variability of estimates obtained from these sub-samples is used to estimate the sample variability surrounding the main estimate.

4 The Excel spreadsheets in the Downloads tab contain all the tables produced for this release and the calculated RSEs for each of the estimates. The RSEs for estimates other than medians have been calculated using the Jackknife method, and RSEs for the medians have been calculated using the Woodruff method.

5 In the tables in this publication, only estimates (numbers, percentages, means and medians) with RSEs less than 25% are considered sufficiently reliable for most purposes. However, estimates with larger RSEs have been included. Estimates with an RSE in the range 25% to 50% should be used with caution while estimates with RSEs greater than 50% are considered too unreliable for general use. All cells in the Excel spreadsheets with RSEs greater than 25% contain a comment indicating the size of the RSE. These cells can be identified by a red indicator in the corner of the cell. The comment appears when the mouse pointer hovers over the cell.

CALCULATION OF STANDARD ERROR

6 RSEs are routinely presented as the measure of sampling error in this publication and related products. SEs can be calculated using the estimates (counts or means) and the corresponding RSEs.

7 An example of the calculation of the SE from an RSE follows. Data Cube 4 shows that the estimated number of males aged 55–59 years who were employed part-time was 78,700 in August 2015, and the RSE for this estimate was 7.6%. The SE is:
    SE of estimate
    = (RSE / 100) x estimate
    = 0.076 x 78,700
    = 6,000 (rounded to the nearest 100)

8 Therefore, there are about two chances in three that the value that would have been produced if all dwellings had been included in the survey would fall within the range 72,700 to 84,700 and about 19 chances in 20 that the value would fall within the range 66.700 to 90.700. This example is illustrated in the following diagram.

Equation: Calculation of relative standard errors of proportions and percentages



PROPORTIONS AND PERCENTAGES

9 Proportions and percentages formed from the ratio of two estimates are also subject to sampling errors. The size of the error depends on the accuracy of both the numerator and the denominator. A formula to approximate the RSEs of proportions not provided in the spreadsheets is given below. This formula is only valid when x is a subset of y.

10 Considering the Data Cube 4, of the 1,503,900 males aged 25-34 years who were employed, 1,314,700 or 87.4% who were full-time workers. The RSE of 1,314,700 is 1.2% and the RSE for 1,503,900 is 1.0%. Applying the above formula, the RSE for the proportion of males aged 25–34 years who were full-time workers:

Equation: Calculation of relative standard errors of proportions and percentages

11 Therefore, the SE for the proportion of males aged 25–34 years who were full-time workers was 0.6 percentage points (= (87.4/100) x 0.7). Therefore, there are about two chances in three that the proportion of males aged 25–34 years who were full-time workers is between 86.8% and 88.0%, and 19 chances in 20 that the proportion was within the range 86.2% to 88.6%.

SUMS OR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ESTIMATES

12 Published estimates may also be used to calculate the sum of two or more estimates, or the difference between two survey estimates (of numbers, means or percentages) where these are not provided in the spreadsheets. Such estimates are also subject to sampling error.

13 The sampling error of the difference between two estimates depends on their SEs and the relationship (correlation) between them. An approximate SE of the difference between two estimates (x–y) may be calculated by the following formula:

Equation: Calculation of relative standard errors of proportions and percentages

14 The sampling error of the sum of two estimates is calculated in a similar way. An approximate SE of the sum of two estimates (x+y) may be calculated by the following formula:

Equation: Calculation of relative standard errors of proportions and percentages

15 Considering the example in paragraph 7, the estimated number of males aged 55–59 years who were employed part-time was 78,700, and the SE for this estimate was 6,000. From the Data Cube 4, the estimate of males aged 60-64 years who were employed part-time was 89,100 and the SE was 5,300. The estimate of males aged 55–64 years who were employed part-time is:

    78,700 + 89,100 = 167,800
16 The SE of the estimate of males aged 55-64 years who were employed part-time is:

Equation: example standard error of estimate

17 Therefore, there are about two chances in three that the value that would have been produced if all dwellings had been included in the survey would fall within the range 159,800 to 175,800 and about 19 chances in 20 that the value would fall within the range 151,800 to 183,800.

18 While these formulae will only be exact for sums of, or differences between, separate and uncorrelated characteristics or subpopulations, it is expected to provide a good approximation for all sums or differences likely to be of interest in this publication.

STANDARD ERRORS OF MEANS AND SUMS

19 The estimates of means and sums of continuous variables are subject to sampling variability and random adjustment. As for population estimates, the variability due to sampling and random adjustment is combined into the calculated Standard Error, and the Relative Standard Error is reported. The component of variability arising from sampling is calculated using the Jackknife method.

STANDARD ERRORS OF QUANTILES

20 The estimates of quantiles such as medians, quartiles, quintiles and deciles are subject to sampling variability and random adjustment. As for population estimates, the variability due to sampling and random adjustment is combined into the calculated Standard Error, and the Relative Standard Error is reported. The component of variability arising from sampling is calculated using the Woodruff method. This is also true for Equal Distribution Quantiles.

SELECTED ESTIMATES AND RSES

The following table shows how the RSEs are displayed for selected estimates in the datacubes.

T14 – Independent contractors, Age group years and state or territory of usual residence – By sex

Sex of person
Males
Females
Persons

Weighted Count
Age group (years)
15–19'000
5.8
2.6
8.7
20–24'000
25.3
12.0
39.0
25–34'000
134.0
48.8
179.6
35–44'000
156.1
74.6
230.7
45–54'000
185.7
65.4
253.0
55–59'000
86.4
30.6
117.6
60–64'000
70.4
21.2
92.1
65 and over'000
72.9
16.9
89.9
State or territory of usual residence
New South Wales'000
232.5
76.0
311.5
Victoria'000
189.5
67.9
254.5
Queensland'000
136.7
60.0
196.1
South Australia'000
43.3
22.6
66.6
Western Australia'000
105.3
34.2
140.6
Tasmania'000
12.9
4.2
16.6
Northern Territory'000
6.4
1.5
7.7
Australian Capital Territory'000
10.3
3.9
14.5
Total'000
738.3
273.3
1,012.2
Relative Standard Error of weighted count
Age group (years)
15–19RSE %
43.8*
60.5**
28.5*
20–24RSE %
15.9
26.1*
13.2
25–34RSE %
6.3
14.9
6.7
35–44RSE %
5.4
7.1
4.8
45–54RSE %
5.5
8.3
4.3
54–59RSE %
7.8
11.4
6.4
60–64RSE %
7.3
13.3
5.6
65 and overRSE %
7.8
17.9
8.0
State or territory of usual residence
New South WalesRSE %
4.6
8.6
4.5
VictoriaRSE %
5.7
10.8
6.1
QueenslandRSE %
6.4
11.4
6.7
South AustraliaRSE %
8.8
11.9
8.2
Western AustraliaRSE %
7.3
12.0
6.9
TasmaniaRSE %
11.8
18.2
11.5
Northern TerritoryRSE %
16.4
27.4*
15.4
Australian Capital TerritoryRSE %
15.3
26.1*
12.7
TotalRSE %
2.7
5.4
2.6

* estimate has a relative standard error of 25% to 50% and should be used with caution
** estimate has a relative standard error greater than 50% and is considered too unreliable for general use

SIGNIFICANCE TESTING

21 A statistical test for any comparisons between estimates can be performed to determine whether it is likely that there is a significant difference between two corresponding population characteristics. The standard error of the difference between two corresponding estimates (x and y) can be calculated using the formula in paragraph 9. This standard error is then used to calculate the following test statistic:

Equation: Calculation of relative standard errors of proportions and percentages

22 If the value of this test statistic is greater than 1.96 then there is evidence, with a 95% level of confidence, of a statistically significant difference in the two populations with respect to that characteristic. Otherwise, it cannot be stated with confidence that there is a difference between the populations with respect to that characteristic.

23 The imprecision due to sampling variability, which is measured by the SE, should not be confused with inaccuracies that may occur because of imperfections in reporting by respondents and recording by interviewers, and errors made in coding and processing data. Inaccuracies of this kind are referred to as non-sampling error, and they occur in any enumeration, whether it be a full count or sample. Every effort is made to reduce non-sampling error to a minimum by careful design of questionnaires, intensive training and supervision of interviewers, and efficient operating procedures.