natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The primary sampling units (PSU) were selected at random, with a probability proportionate to the size of the CEA depending on the definition of the target population and previously stratified by region and type of settlement.
Primarne vzorčne enote (PSU) so bile izbrane naključno, z verjetnostjo, sorazmerno z velikostjo CEA glede na opredelitev ciljne populacije ter predhodno stratificirano po regijah in tipih naselja.
On the second level, in each of the selected PSUs 10 persons/sampling units were selected through simple random sampling.
Na drugi stopnji je bilo v vsaki od izbranih primarnih vzorčnih enot (PSU) z enostavnim naključnim vzorčenjem izbranih 10 oseb/vzorčnih enot.
The sample is therefore composed of 2,000 persons (200 PSU x 10 persons = 2,000 persons).
Vzorec je torej sestavljen iz 2.000 oseb (200 PSU x 10 oseb = 2.000 oseb).
Since we had to provide at least 1,200 completed surveys, with an expected 60-percent response level (realisation) we needed a slightly bigger sample, in other words at least 2,000 persons.
Ker je bilo treba zagotoviti najmanj 1.200 izpolnjenih anket, smo ob pričakovani 60-odstotni stopnji odzivnosti (realizacije) potrebovali nekoliko večji vzorec, torej vsaj 2.000 oseb.
For each person in the sample we obtained the following data: name and surname, street and house number, code and name of settlement, postcode and postal name, code and name of municipality, code and name of settlement type, code and name of statistical region, age bracket of person (15-18 years, 19-24 years, 25-29 years).
Za vsako osebo v vzorcu smo dobili te podatke: ime in priimek osebe, ulico in hišno številko, šifro in ime naselja, poštno številko in ime pošte, šifro in ime občine, šifro in ime tipa naselja, šifro in ime statistične regije, starostni razred osebe (15-18 let, 19-24 let, 25-29 let).
1.1.2 Conducting the survey
1.1.2 Izvedba ankete
Data collection was conducted in the form of personal surveying in the field.
Zbiranje podatkov je potekalo v obliki osebnega anketiranja na terenu.
This began on 27 July 2010 and ended on 24 September 2010.
Začelo se je 27. julija 2010 in končalo24. septembra 2010.
Interviewers received precise instructions for the survey at preliminary induction seminars (in Maribor, Ljubljana and Divača).
Anketarji so na predhodnih uvajalnih seminarjih (v Mariboru, Ljubljani in Divači) prejeli natančna navodila za anketiranje.
Prior to the start of surveying in the field, all persons included in the sample were informed in writing of the survey and invited to participate.
Vse osebe, vključene v vzorec, so bile pred začetkom terenskega dela o anketiranju pisno obveščene in povabljene k sodelovanju.
We requested the interviewers to go out into the field immediately after the induction seminar, and to be available for at least four weeks from the start.
Od anketarjev smo zahtevali, da se odpravijo na teren takoj po uvajalnem seminarju in da so na razpolago vsaj 4 tedne od začetka.
They had to visit each person on the record sheet (10 persons per individual PSU) and to try to perform as many surveys as possible.
Obiskati so morali vsako osebo na evidenčnem listu (10 oseb na posamezni PSU) in poskušati opraviti čim več anket.
Where necessary, they were required to make five visits to the individual person.
Pri posamezni osebi so morali po potrebi opraviti 5 obiskov.
In order to improve the survey, interviewers visited their allocated persons at different times.
Za boljšo izvedbo ankete so anketarji dodeljene osebe obiskovali ob različnem času.
When a person was not at home, they were left a notification letter with the interviewer's details for easier coordination of the date and time of surveying.
Osebam, ki jih ni bilo doma, so pustili tudi obvestilno pismo s svojimi podatki za lažje usklajevanje datuma in ure anketiranja.
In this way we succeeded in reaching those interviewees that had been absent for a long time in the summer months.
Tako nam je uspelo doseči tudi tiste anketirance, ki so bili v poletnih mesecih dalj časa odsotni.
Interviewers had to make precise records of individual visits and the success of those visits.
Anketarji so morali natančno zapisovati posamezne obiske in uspešnost teh obiskov.
Moreover they were required to check in weekly from the field and report on progress, possible problems and other activities.
Poleg tega so se morali tedensko javljati s terena in poročati o napredku, morebitnih težavah in drugih dejavnostih.
If a person was not reachable at the given address, the interviewer attempted to find out the new address and visit the person there.
Če oseba ni bila dosegljiva na navedenem naslovu, je anketar poskušal izvedeti novi naslov in jo obiskati na novem naslovu.
If the new address was too far away, it would be allocated to the nearest interviewer.
Če je bil ta preveč oddaljen, smo ga dodelili najbližjemu anketarju.
If two persons from the same household (e.g. two brothers or a brother and sister, as indicated by the surname and residential address) were given at one PSU, interviewers received the instruction to interview just one person from that household, which is customary in surveying given the similarity of sampling units from the same household.
Če sta bili na eni vzorčni točki (PSU) navedeni dve osebi iz istega gospodinjstva (npr. dva brata ali brat in sestra, kar je bilo razvidno iz priimka in naslova bivališča), so anketarji dobili navodilo, da anketirajo samo eno osebo iz tega gospodinjstva, kar je zaradi podobnosti vzorčnih enot iz istega gospodinjstva pri anketiranju običajno.
There were in fact few such cases, amounting to around 1 percent of all sampling units.
Takih primerov sicer ni bilo veliko, približno 1 odstotek vseh vzorčnih enot.
When the interviewing was completed, we checked the validity of the survey by means of a check-up letter and/or telephone call.
Po končanem anketiranju smo veljavnost anket preverili s pomočjo kontrolnega pisma in/ali telefonskega klica.
Interviewers obtained from each surveyed person their telephone number, exclusively for checking the quality of the work of interviewers in the field.
Anketar je namreč od vsake anketirane osebe pridobil še njeno telefonsko številko, in sicer izključno zaradi preverjanja kakovosti dela anketarjev na terenu.
In order to ensure the anonymity and confidentiality of the collected data, the personal data of interviewees and contact data were kept separately from their responses to survey questions.
Zaradi zagotavljanja anonimnosti in zaupnosti zbranih podatkov so bili osebni podatki anketirancev in podatki za stike vodeni ločeno od njihovih odgovorov na anketna vprašanja.
1.1.3 Level of participation in the research
1.1.3 Analiza stopnje sodelovanja v raziskavi
The level of participation or response was 62.9 percent.
Stopnja sodelovanja oz. odzivnosti je 62,9-odstotna.
This means that of 2,000 persons selected for the sample, we interviewed 1,257 persons.
To pomeni, da smo med 2.000 osebami, izbranimi v vzorec, anketirali 1.257 oseb.
This response rate is at the level that is usual for this kind of field survey in Slovenia,3 and from the methodological aspect it can be regarded as
Dosežena stopnja odzivnosti je na ravni, ki je običajna za tovrstne terenske raziskave v Sloveniji3 in jo lahko z metodološkega vidika označimo kot
3 In the latest EVS (European Values Survey, 2008), on the Slovenian level, for instance, the sample selected 2,250 inhabitants of Slovenia aged over 15 years; the realised sample amounted to N = 1286.
3 Pri zadnji raziskavi EVS (European Values Survey, 2008) je bilo v vzorec na ravni Slovenije na primer izbranih 2.250prebivalcev Republike Slovenije, starejših od 15 let; realizirani vzorec pa je znašal N = 1286.
good4.
dobro4.
In all probability the level of response would have been significantly higher if the surveying had not been conducted in the summer months, in other words during people's holidays.
Stopnja odziva bi bila zelo verjetno še bistveno višja, če anketiranje ne bi potekalo v poletnih mesecih, torej med dopusti.
Although the reasons for non-participation differ, for the most part they can be categorised into two levels (Vehovar and Kalton, 2001: 80).
Čeprav so razlogi za nesodelovanje različni, pa jih večinoma lahko razvrstimo na dve ravni (Vehovar in Kalton, 2001: 80).
The first is non-participation in the survey owing to the poor locating of the unit (inappropriate or wrong address, absence of interviewee during survey, interviewer did not make contact with person).
Prva je nesodelovanje v raziskavi zaradi slabega lociranja enote (neustrezen ali napačen naslov, odsotnost anketiranca med raziskavo, anketar ni vzpostavil stika z osebo).
The second is unwillingness to participate or refusal to participate for various reasons (e.g. illness, language barrier, uninteresting subject, lack of trust and so forth).
Druga pa je nepripravljenost za sodelovanje oziroma zavrnitev sodelovanja zaradi različnih razlogov (npr. bolezen, neznanje jezika, nezanimiva tematika, nezaupanje itd.).
Around 20 percent of persons in the sample were the type that the interviewers could not reach even after five or more visits, while over 15 percent declined participation in the survey (Table 1).
Približno 20 odstotkov oseb v vzorcu je bilo takih, s katerimi anketarjem tudi v petih ali več obiskih ni uspelo vzpostaviti stika, dobrih 15 odstotkov oseb pa je zavrnilo sodelovanje v raziskavi (preglednica 1).
Details of the reasons for non-participation in the survey are broken down below.
Podrobnejši razlogi za nesodelovanje v raziskavi so podrobneje razčlenjeni v nadaljevanju.
Table 1: Level of participation in the Youth 2010 survey
Preglednica 1: Stopnja sodelovanja v raziskavi Mladina 2010
Fully completed survey
V celoti opravljena anketa
Other reason (partly completed survey, appointment, other)
Drug razlog (delno opravljena anketa, zmenek, drugo)
Other reasons for non-participation in this group (N = 391) include absence of interviewee owing to moving away to some other location or to an unknown location (total 24.3 percent) and inappropriate or wrong address (12.5 percent).
Drugi razlogi za nesodelovanje v tej skupini (N = 391) so še odsotnost anketiranca zaradi selitve v drug kraj oz. neznano kam (skupaj 24,3 odstotka) ter neustrezen oz. napačen naslov (12,5 odstotka).
slightly higher response level of 66.2 percent was achieved for Slovenia in the survey of national and international security (2009).
Na celotnem vzorcu je bilo torej 2,5 odstotka napačnih naslovov, slabih 5 odstotkov oseb ni bilo dosegljivih na danih naslovih, dobra polovica je bilo takih, ki jih anketarji niso našli doma.
Of those who declined participation in the survey (15.6 percent of the entire sample), the great majority (84.6 percent) personally declined, while for the others someone else declined on their behalf.
4 Earl Babbie, eden trenutno vodilnih metodologov v svetu, na podlagi pregleda metodološke literature ocenjuje stopnjo odziva nad 50 % kot zadostno, nad 60 % kot dobro, nad 70 % pa kot zelo dobro (Babbie, 2007: 289).
The second most frequent reason for refusal was the belief that participating in the survey was a waste of time (18.3 percent).
Razlogi za zavrnitev so podrobno razčlenjeni v preglednici 2.
The reasons for refusal are set out in detail in Table 2.
Preglednica 2: Podrobno razčlenjene kategorije nesodelovanja
Table 2: Detailed breakdown of category of non-participation
Anketa v celoti rešena Delno opravljena anketa (prekinitev sredi ankete) Zmenek
Other reason (partly completed survey, appointment)
Anketiranca ni doma ...
Fully completed survey Partly completed survey (interrupted in mid-survey) Appointment
Anketiranec med anketiranjem ni dosegljiv (živi v drugi državi, preselil se je neznano kam, ...)
Other*
Drugo*
Total
Skupaj
NOTE: *Other: mentally disabled person, two persons in same household.
OPOMBA: *Drugo: duševno prizadeta oseba, dve osebi iz istega gospodinjstva.
Percentage of all refusals
Skupaj
Percentage of entire sample (N = 2000)
Preglednica 3: Razlogi za zavrnitev sodelovanja
Not interested, don't want to
Me ne zanima, nočem sodelovati
Inappropriate subject (don't know enough about this, no opinion, it is too difficult etc.)
Neprimerna tematika (ne vem dovolj o tem, nimam mnenja, ne pretežko ipd.)
Seems a waste of time
Se mi zdi izguba časa
Intrusion of my privacy, not giving personal data
Posega v mojo zasebnost, ne dajem osebnih podatkov
Never take part in surveys
Nikoli ne sodelujem v anketah
Don't trust surveys
Ne zaupam anketam
I get too many surveys
Preveč pogosto me anketirajo
I have bad previous experiences with surveys
Imam slabe predhodne izkušnje z anketami
Family/household member or members won't let me take part
Član ali člani družine/gospodinjstva mi ne dovolijo sodelovati
owing to illness.
Odstotek glede na celotni vzorec (N = 2000)
Table 4: Participation in survey by gender and age
Preglednica 4: Sodelovanje v raziskavi glede na spol in starost
female
ženski
Contact not established with interviewee
Ni vzpostavil stika z anketirancem
Refusal (survey declined by interviewee or someone else)
Zavrnitev (anketo je zavrnil anketiranec oz. kdo drug)
Other reason (partly completed survey, appointment)
Drug razlog (delno opravljena anketa, zmenek)
male
moški
15 to 18 years
15 do 18 let (%)
18 to 24
18 do 24
25 to 29
25 do 29
The response level was slightly higher among females than among males.
Stopnja odzivnosti je bila nekoliko višja med ženskami kot med moškimi.
Among persons aged between 15 and 18 years, the response was even higher than 70 percent, while among persons aged between 25 and 29 years the response level was only a little over 57 percent.
Pri osebah, starih med 15 in 18 let, je odzivnost celo višja od 70 odstotkov, pri osebah, starih med 25 in 29 let, pa znaša samo še dobrih 57 odstotkov.
This includes a large number of students residing in large towns and cities, or those that have moved away for some other reason.
Med njimi je veliko študentov, ki prebivajo v večjih mestih, ali pa takih, ki so se preselili drugam zaradi drugega razloga.
Among those over 18 years old, contact could not be established with one out of five persons.
Med tistimi, starejšimi od 18 let, ni bilo mogoče vzpostaviti stika z vsako peto osebo.
It is also interesting to note that as age increases, so does the probability of participation in the survey being declined.
Zanimivo je tudi to, da s starostjo narašča verjetnost zavrnitve sodelovanja v raziskavi.
Indeed the oldest age group yielded a refusal rate almost twice that of the youngest group.
V skupini najstarejših oseb je namreč delež zavrnitev skoraj dvakrat večji kot v skupini najmlajših oseb.
Non-farming se lement of less than 2,000 inhabitants (%)
Preglednica 5: Sodelovanje v raziskavi glede na tip naselja
Farming se lement of less than 2,000 inhabitants (%)
V celoti opravljena anketa
Se lement of between 2,000 and 10,000 inhabitants (%)
Ni vzpostavil stika z anketirancem 16,0 Zavrnitev (anketo je zavrnil anketiranec oz. kdo drug)
Se lement of more than 10,000 inhabitants (%)
Drug razlog (delno opravljena anketa, zmenek)
Maribor (%)
Skupaj
Fully completed survey Contact not established with interviewee Refusal (survey declined by interviewee or someone else) Other reason (partly completed survey, appointment) Total
Po pričakovanjih so imeli anketarji, ki so delo opravljali v večjih urbanih središčih, več težav kot anketarji na podeželju.
We identified the worst response rate in Maribor, where less than half of the 60 persons selected for the sample agreed to participate in the survey.
Zavrnitev je bilo sicer malo, vendar najbrž zaradi tega, ker skoraj s polovico oseb na tem območju ni bilo mogoče vzpostaviti stika.
There was not actually a high level of refusal, the problem seemed mainly to be that nearly half the persons in that area could not be reached.
V Ljubljani smo sicer dosegli zadovoljivo stopnjo odzivnosti, vendar smo se morali za to tudi veliko bolj potruditi kot drugod, kljub temu pa z vsakim četrtim anketirancem nismo vzpostavili stika.
Fully completed survey 70.8 67.0 61.4 61.1 75.0 50.0 63.3 63.3 63.3 58.0 70.0 40.0 Contact not established with interviewee
V celoti opravljena anketa 70,8 67,0 61,4 61,1 75,0 50,0 63,3 63,3 63,3 58,0 70,0 40,0 Ni vzpostavil stika z anketirancem
The highest response level, at 75 percent, was achieved in the Zasavje region.
Najvišjo, 75-odstotno odzivnost smo dosegli v Zasavski regiji.
There were also high levels of willingness to participate in the Pomurje and Goriško regions.
Visoka stopnja pripravljenosti za sodelovanje je bila še v Pomurski in Goriški regiji.
On the other hand the response level was by far the lowest in the Coastal-Karst region (mainly because of the large proportion of selected persons with whom contact could not be established) and in the Lower Posavje region.
Po drugi strani je bila stopnja odzivnosti daleč najnižja v Obalnokraški regiji (predvsem zaradi velikega deleža izbranih oseb, s katerimi ni bilo mogoče vzpostaviti stika), pa tudi v Spodnjeposavski regiji.
1.1.4 Weighting
1.1.4 Uteževanje
Since persons were selected with varying probabilities, and also owing to non-participation, refusal and other ‘errors', the demographic characteristics of the selected sample are to some extent at variance with the characteristics of the target population.
Ker so bile osebe izbrane z različnimi verjetnostmi, pa tudi zaradi nesodelovanja, zavrnitve in drugih »napak«, demografske značilnosti izbranega vzorca nekoliko odstopajo od značilnosti ciljne populacije.
The weighting gives some parts of the sample greater weight than others and vice versa.
Reprezentativnost vzorca smo zagotovili na podlagi spola, starosti (tri starostne skupine: 15-18, 19-24, 25-29 let), tipa naselja in statistične regije.
Pomurje (%)
Pomurska (%)
Podravje (%)
Podravska (%)
Savinja (%)
Savinjska (%)
Zasavje (%)
Zasavska (%)
Lower Posavje (%)
Spodnjeposavska (%)
Southeast Slovenia (%)
Jugovzhodna Slovenija (%)
Central Slovenia (%)
Osrednjeslovenska (%)
Notranjska-Karst (%)
Notranjsko-kraška (%)
Goriško (%)
Goriška (%)
Coastal-Karst (%)
Obalno-kraška (%)
The data prior to and after weighting are shown in Table 7.
Podatki pred uteževanjem in po njem so prikazani v preglednici 7.
The data show that we selected a good sample, since the variance of the sample from the target population is relatively small.
Iz njih je razvidno, da smo izbrali dober vzorec, saj so odstopanja vzorca od ciljne populacije razmeroma majhna.
This is also confirmed by the small range between weights, with the smallest weight amounting to 0.69 and the biggest to 1.92.
Tezo potrjuje tudi majhen razpon med utežmi - najmanjša utež namreč znaša 0,69, največja pa le 1,92.
Gender
Moški
male female
Ženski
15-18 years
15-18 let
19-24 years
19-24 let
25-29 years
25-29 let
Pomurje
Pomurska
Podravje
Podravska
Savinja
Savinjska
Zasavje
Zasavska
Southeast
Osrednjeslovenska
Coastal-Karst
Skupaj
Total
Tip naselja
Ljubljana
Maribor
Total
Ljubljana
Sample
Vzorec
Selected sample without weights
Izbrani vzorec brez uteži
Selected sample with weights
Izbrani vzorec z utežmi
1.1.5 Sample error
1.1.5 Vzorčna napaka
Below we present the values of standard errors of sample estimates in certain selected questions.
V nadaljevanju predstavljamo vrednosti standardnih napak vzorčnih ocen pri nekaterih izbranih vprašanjih.
The standard error of the estimate shows a variance in the sample value from the population value.
Standardna napaka ocene prikazuje odstopanje vzorčne vrednosti od populacijske vrednosti.
This signifies the basis for calculating the confidence interval, which shows the range in which the population value varies with 95-percent certainty.
Pomeni podlago za izračun intervala zaupanja, ki pokaže, v kakšnem razponu se s 95-odstotno gotovostjo giblje populacijska vrednost.
The standard error of estimating the share SE (p) was calculated according to the formula:
Standardno napako ocene deleža SE (p) smo izračunali po formuli:
SE (p) = (p*(100-p)/N)1/2, where p means the weighted percentage of given responses, and N the sample size (N = 1,257).
SE (p) = (p*(100 - p)/N)1/2, kjer p pomeni utežen odstotek danih odgovorov, N pa velikost vzorca (N = 1.257).
Since this formula for calculating the standard estimate error applies only to a simple random sample, and we used a two-level sample or sampling in groups (selection of PSUs according to previously determined criteria and random selection of interviewees within the PSU), the standard estimate error needs to be corrected with the design effect (deff) according to the formula:
Ker ta formula za izračun standardne napake ocene velja le za enostavni naključni vzorec, mi pa smo uporabili dvostopenjski vzorec oz. vzorčenje v skupinah (izbor osnovnih vzorčnih enot PSU po vnaprej določenih merilih in naključni izbor anketirancev znotraj PSU), je treba standardno napako ocene popraviti s faktorjem vzorčnega učinka (deff) po formuli:
corrected SE (p) = (deff*p*(100-p)/N)1/2
korigirana SE (p) = (deff*p*(100 - p)/N)1/2
This means that the sample does not “capture” the overall variability in the population, which can be seen in the less precise estimates of population values (greater standard estimate error and wider confidence interval than in the simple random sample).
To pomeni, da z vzorcem ne »zajamemo« celotne spremenljivosti v populaciji, kar se kaže v manj natančnih ocenah populacijskih vrednosti (večja standardna napaka ocene in širši interval zaupanja kot pri enostavnem naključnem vzorcu).
The table below shows, for instance, that the corrected SE(p) is higher than the SE(p) in all cases.
V spodnji preglednici je npr. razvidno, da je korigirana SE (p) v vseh primerih višja od SE (p).
We calculated the 95-percent confidence interval on the basis of corrected values of the standard estimate error according to the formulae:
95-odstotni interval zaupanja smo izračunali na podlagi popravljenih vrednosti standardne napake ocene po formulah:
lower limit = p - corrected SE (p)*1.96
spodnja meja = p - korigirana SE (p)*1,96
upper limit = p + corrected SE (p)*1.96
zgornja meja = p + korigirana SE (p)*1,96
The size of the design effect deff was calculated for each variable (question) separately according to the formula:
Velikost vzorčnega učinka deff smo izračunali za vsako spremenljivko (vprašanje) posebej po formuli:
deff = 1 + (n - 1)*ICC (Leskošek, 2009), where n is the average number of interviews performed per individual PSU (n = 6.69), and ICC is the intraclass correlation coefficient.
deff = 1 + (n - 1)*ICC (Leskošek, 2009), kjer n pomeni povprečno število opravljenih anket na posamezni PSU (n = 6,69), ICC pa koeficient intraklasne korelacije.
The greater the intraclass correlation coefficient, and the greater the number of interviewed persons within the PSU, the greater is the design effect.
Večja, kot je interklasna korelacija, in večje, kot je število anketiranih oseb znotraj PSU, večji je vzorčni učinek.
The intraclass correlation coefficient is the measure of similarity of interviewees within the PSU, and shows how far the overall variability in the data can be explained by belonging to a group.
Koeficient intraklasne korelacije je mera podobnosti anketirancev znotraj PSU in pokaže, koliko celotne spremenljivosti v podatkih lahko pojasnimo s pripadnostjo skupini.
In the simple random sample ICC = 0, in other words the size of the design effect amounts to deff = 1 and does not affect the calculation of SE(p).
Pri enostavnem naključnem vzorcu je ICC = 0, torej velikost vzorčnega učinka znaša deff = 1 in ne vpliva na izračun SE (p).
We calculated the intraclass correlation coefficient according to the formula:
Koeficient intraklasne korelacije smo izračunali po formuli:
ICC = (MSMED - MSZN)/(MSMED + (k - 1)*MSZN), where MSMED is the measure of variability between groups (between PSUs), MSZN is the measure of variability within groups (PSU), and k is the number of interviewed individuals in the group (PSU).5
ICC = (MSMED - MSZN)/(MSMED + (k - 1)*MSZN), kjer MSMED pomeni mero spremenljivosti med skupinami (med PSU), MSZN mero spremenljivosti znotraj skupin (PSU), k pa število anketiranih posameznikov v skupini (PSU).5
5 Since k differed in different groups, we used the average number of interviewees per group, k = 6.69.
5 Ker se je k pri različnih skupinah razlikoval, smo uporabili povprečno število anketirancev na skupino, in sicer k = 6,69.