English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of this paper is to compare sample quality across two probability samples and one that uses probabilistic cluster sampling combined with random route and quota sampling within the selected clusters in order to define the ultimate survey units. All of them use the face-to-face interview as the survey procedure. The hypothesis to be tested is that it is possible to achieve the same degree of representativeness using a combination of random route sampling and quota sampling (with substitution) as it can be achieved by means of household sampling (without substitution) based on the municipal register of inhabitants. We have found such marked differences in the age and gender distribution of the probability sampling, where the deviations exceed 6%. A different picture emerges when it comes to comparing the employment variables, where the quota sampling overestimates the economic activity rate (2.5%) and the unemployment rate (8%) and underestimates the employment rate (3.46%).

Random Route and Quota Sampling: Do They Offer Any Advantage over Probably Sampling Methods?