1932

Abstract

This article reviews the US federal statistical system from its roots in the colonial period and the early years of the federal republic through its growth in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to the present day, including the coordination role played by the US Office of Management and Budget. The review highlights the innovations, benefits, and challenges of the federal statistical system and comments on the role played by major sources of data for the system, including censuses, probability surveys, administrative records, and newer sources. The article also assesses the strengths and weaknesses of the system from studies of the Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT), a standing unit of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine established in 1972 to link the academic community with federal statisticians and researchers. It concludes with observations on the future of the federal statistical system.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-statistics-041715-033405
2016-06-01
2024-06-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/statistics/3/1/annurev-statistics-041715-033405.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-statistics-041715-033405&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Anderson AF, Neidert L. 2012. Dissemination of data: electronic products. See Anderson et al. 2012. 182–88
  2. Anderson MJ. 2010. The census and the federal statistical system: historical perspectives. See Prewitt 2010. 152–62
  3. Anderson MJ. 2012. Introduction. See Anderson et al. 2012. xi–xvi
  4. Anderson MJ. 2015. The American Census: A Social History New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderson MJ, Citro CF, Salvo JJ. 2012. Encyclopedia of the U.S. Census: From the Constitution to the American Community Survey. Washington, DC: CQ Press., 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  6. Anderson MJ, Fienberg S. 1999 (2001). Who Counts? The Politics of Census-Taking in Contemporary America New York: Russell Sage [Google Scholar]
  7. Bailar BA. 1990. Contributions to statistical methodology from the U.S. federal government. Surv. Methodol. 16:151–57 [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown L, Citro C, House C, Marton K, Mackie C. 2014. The past, present, and future of federal surveys: observations from the Committee on National Statistics. Presented at JSM 2014, Aug. 2–7, Boston [Google Scholar]
  9. Bryant BE, Dunn W. 1995. Moving Power and Money: The Politics of Census Taking Ithaca, NY: New Strategist [Google Scholar]
  10. Carlucci P. 1980. The impact of an adjustment to the 1980 census on congressional and legislative reapportionment. Proc. 1980 Conf. Census Undercount145–52 Washington, DC: US Dep. Commer. Bur. Census [Google Scholar]
  11. Chetty R, Hendren N, Kline P, Saez E. 2014. Where is the Land of Opportunity? The Geography of Intergenerational Mobility in the United States Work. Pap. 19843, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res. [Google Scholar]
  12. Choldin H. 1994. Looking for the Last Percent: The Controversy Over Census Adjustment New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  13. Citro CF. 2012a. Advisory committees. See Anderson et al. 2012. 32–35
  14. Citro CF. 2012b. Editing, imputation, and weighting. See Anderson et al. 2012. 201–4
  15. Citro CF. 2014a. From multiple modes for surveys to multiple data sources for estimates. Surv. Methodol. 40:137–61 [Google Scholar]
  16. Citro CF. 2014b. Principles and practices for a federal statistical agency: why, what, and to what effect. Stat. Public Policy 1:51–59 [Google Scholar]
  17. Congressional Quarterly 1990. Hill-Bush Impasse Kills Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Measure. CQ Alm. 1990, 46th ed.291–93 http://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal90-1112584 [Google Scholar]
  18. Couper MP. 2013. Is the sky falling? New technology, changing media, and the future of surveys. Surv. Methodol. 7:3145–56 [Google Scholar]
  19. Czajka JL. 2009. SIPP data quality. See NRC 2009b, Append. A.
  20. Czajka JL. 2012. An assessment of data sources for measuring medical care economic risk. See NRC/IOM 2012 281–91
  21. Czajka JL, Denmead G. 2012. Income measurement for the 21st century: updating the current population survey Final Rep., Math. Policy Res., Washington, DC. http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/∼/media/publications/PDFs/family_support/income_measurement_21century.pdf [Google Scholar]
  22. Czajka JL, Jacobson JE, Cody S. 2004. Survey estimates of wealth: a comparative analysis and review of the Survey of Income and Program Participation. Soc. Secur. Bull. 65:1 http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v65n1/v65n1p63.html [Google Scholar]
  23. De Leeuw ED, De Heer W. 2002. Trends in household survey nonresponse: a longitudinal and international comparison. Survey Nonresponse RM Groves, DA Dillman, JL Eltinge, RJA Little 41–54 New York: Wiley [Google Scholar]
  24. Dillman DA. 1996. Why innovation is difficult in government surveys. J. Off. Stat. 12:2113–24 [Google Scholar]
  25. Duncan JW, Shelton WC. 1978. Revolution in United States Government Statistics,1926–1976 Washington, DC: US Dep. Commer., Off. Fed. Stat. Policy Standards [Google Scholar]
  26. Eckler AR. 1972. The Bureau of the Census New York: Praeger [Google Scholar]
  27. Econ. Stat. Adm. 2014. Fostering Innovation, Creating Jobs, Driving Better Decisions: The Value of Government Data. Washington, DC: US Dep. Commer. Off. Chief Econ. [Google Scholar]
  28. Elhami S, Lamacchia RA. 2012. Geographic information systems (GIS). See Anderson et al. 2012. 247–53
  29. Fienberg SE, Tanur JT. 1990. A historical perspective on the institutional bases for survey research in the United States. Surv. Methodol. 16:131–46 [Google Scholar]
  30. Goldberg JP, Moye WT. 1985. The first hundred years of the Bureau of Labor Statistics Bull. 2235, US Bur. Labor Stat., Washington, DC. https://archive.org/details/TheFirst100YearsOfTheBureauOfLaborStatistics [Google Scholar]
  31. Gravelle H, Rees R. 2004. Microeconomics Harlow, UK: Pearson, 3rd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  32. Groves RM. 2011. Three eras of survey research. Public Opin. Q. 75:9861–71 [Google Scholar]
  33. Groves RM, Couper MP. 1998. Nonresponse in Household Interview Surveys New York: Wiley [Google Scholar]
  34. Harris-Kojetin B. 2012. Federal household surveys. See Anderson et al. 2012, pp. 226–34
  35. Harwood T. 2014. Big data: Are we making a big mistake?. Stat. Signif. 11:14–17 [Google Scholar]
  36. Hillygus DS, Nie NH, Prewitt K, Pals H. 2006. Politics and science in census taking Russell Sage Found., New York Popul. Ref. Bur., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  37. Horrigan MW. 2013. Big data: a BLS perspective. Amstat News 427:25–27 [Google Scholar]
  38. Landefeld JS. 2014. Uses of big data for official statistics: privacy incentives, statistical challenges, and other issues Presented at Int. Conf. Big Data for Off. Stat., Beijing [Google Scholar]
  39. Manski CF. 2014. Communicating uncertainty in official economic statistics Work. Pap. 20098, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, MA [Google Scholar]
  40. Marcuss RD, Kane RE. 2007. U.S. national income and product statistics—born of the Great Depression and World War II. Surv. Curr. Bus. 87:232–46 http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2007/02%20February/0207_history_article.pdf [Google Scholar]
  41. McMillen D. 2012. Apportionment and districting. See Anderson et al. 2012. 49–58
  42. Meyer BD, Mok WKC, Sullivan JX. 2009. The under-reporting of transfers in household surveys: its nature and consequences Work. Pap. 15181, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, MA [Google Scholar]
  43. Meyer BD, Mok WKC, Sullivan JX. 2015. Household surveys in crisis Work. Pap. 21399, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, MA [Google Scholar]
  44. Mitroff II, Mason RO, Barabba VP. 1983. Census 1980: Policymaking amid Turbulence Lexington, MA: Lexingt. Books [Google Scholar]
  45. Norwood JL. 1995. Organizing to Count: Change in the Federal Statistical System Washington, DC: Urban Inst. Press [Google Scholar]
  46. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1984. Cognitive aspects of survey methodology: building a bridge between disciplines Rep. Adv. Res. Semin. Cogn. Asp. Surv. Methodol., Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  47. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1985a. Natural gas data needs in a changing regulatory environment Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  48. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1985b. The bicentennial census: new directions for methodology in 1990 Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  49. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1986. Creating a center for education statistics: a time for action Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  50. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1993a. Private lives and public policies: confidentiality and accessibility of government statistics Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Soc. Sci. Res. Counc., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  51. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1993b. The future of the Survey of Income and Program Participation Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  52. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1995a. Measuring poverty—a new approach Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  53. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1995b. Modernizing the U.S. census Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  54. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1997. The Bureau of Transportation Statistics: priorities for the future. Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Transp. Res. Board, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  55. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1999a. Measuring a changing nation: modern methods for the 2000 census Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  56. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 1999b. Sowing seeds of change: informing public policy in the economic research service of USDA Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  57. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2000a. Measuring the science and engineering enterprise: priorities for the division of science resource studies Rep. Off. Sci. Eng. Pers. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  58. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.). 2000b. Small-area estimates of school-age children in poverty: evaluation of current methodology Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  59. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2000c. Small-area income and poverty estimates: priorities for 2000 and beyond. Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  60. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2000d. Time-use measurement and research: report of a workshop. Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  61. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2002. At what price? Conceptualizing and measuring cost-of-living and price indexes Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  62. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2003. Measuring personal travel and goods movement: a review of the bureau of transportation statistics' surveys—special report 227 Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Transp. Res. Board, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  63. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2004a. Reengineering the 2010 census: risks and challenges Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  64. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.). 2004b. The 2000 census: counting under adversity Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  65. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2005a. Beyond the market: designing nonmarket accounts for the United States. Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  66. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2005b. Expanding access to research data: reconciling risks and opportunities Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  67. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2005c. Improving data to analyze food and nutrition policies Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  68. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.). 2005d. Measuring research and development expenditures in the U.S. economy Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  69. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2006a. Food insecurity and hunger in the United States: an assessment of the measure Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  70. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2006b. Once, only once, and in the right place: residence rules in the decennial census Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  71. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2007a. State and local government statistics at a crossroads Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  72. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.). 2007b. Understanding American agriculture: challenges for the agricultural resource management survey Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  73. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2007c. Understanding business dynamics: an integrated data system for America's future Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  74. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2007d. Using the American community survey: benefits and challenges Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  75. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2008. Surveying victims: options for conducting the National Crime Victimization Survey Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Comm. Law Justice, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  76. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2009a. Ensuring the quality, credibility, and relevance of U.S. justice statistics. Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Comm. Law Justice., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  77. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2009b. Reengineering the Survey of Income and Program Participation Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  78. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2010a. Accounting for health and health care: approaches to measuring the sources and costs of their improvement Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  79. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2010b. Conducting biosocial surveys: collecting, storing, accessing, and protecting biospecimens and biodata Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Comm. Popul., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  80. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2010c. Envisioning the 2020 census Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  81. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2011a. Change and the 2020 census: not whether but how Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  82. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2011b. Facilitating innovation in the federal statistical system: summary of a workshop Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  83. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2011c. The future of federal household surveys: a workshop summary Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  84. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2012a. Communicating science and engineering data in the information age Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Comput. Sci. Telecommun. Board, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  85. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2012b. Effective tracking of building energy use: improving the commercial buildings and residential energy consumption surveys Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  86. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2012c. Measuring what we spend: toward a new consumer expenditure survey Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  87. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2012d. Small populations, large effects: improving the measurement of the group quarters population in the American Community Survey. Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  88. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2012e. Using science as evidence in public policy Rep. Div. Behav. Soc. Sci. Educ., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  89. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2013a. Nonresponse in social science surveys: a research agenda Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  90. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2013b. Principles and Practices for a Federal Statistical Agency Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press., 5th ed.. [Google Scholar]
  91. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2013c. Subjective well being: measuring happiness, suffering, and other dimensions of experience Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  92. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2014a. Capturing change in science, technology and innovation: improving indicators to inform policy Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Board Sci. Tech. Ecol. Policy, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  93. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2014b. Civic engagement and social cohesion: measuring dimensions of social capital to inform policy Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  94. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2014c. Estimating the incidence of rape and sexual assault Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  95. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2015. Realizing the potential of the American community survey: challenges, tradeoffs, and opportunities Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  96. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.)/IOM (Inst. Med.) 2012. Medical care economic risk: measuring financial vulnerability from spending on medical care Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Board Health Care Serv., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  97. NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.)/IOM (Inst. Med.) 2014. The National Children's Study 2014: an assessment Rep. Comm. Natl. Stat. Board Child. Youth Fam., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  98. OMB (US Off. Manag. Budg.) 1985. Statistical policy directive on compilation, release, and evaluation of principal federal economic indicators. Fed. Regist. 50:18638932–34 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/inforeg/statpolicy/dir_3_fr_09251985.pdf [Google Scholar]
  99. OMB (US Off. Manag. Budg.) 2007. Implementation guidance for Title V of the E-Government Act, Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act of 2002 (CIPSEA). Fed. Regist. 72:11533362–77 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/fedreg/2007/061507_cipsea_guidance.pdf [Google Scholar]
  100. OMB (US Off. Manag. Budg.) 2014a. Guidance for providing and using administrative data for statistical purposes Memo. Heads Exec. Dep. Agencies M-14–06, Washington, DC. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2014/m-14-06.pdf [Google Scholar]
  101. OMB (US Off. Manag. Budg.) 2014b. Statistical policy directive no. 1: fundamental responsibilities of federal statistical agencies and recognized statistical units. Fed. Regist. 79:23171610–16 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-12-02/pdf/2014-28326.pdf [Google Scholar]
  102. OMB (US Off. Manag. Budg.) 2015. Statistical programs of the United States government, fiscal year 2016. Stat. Sci. Policy Off., Off. Inf. Regul. Aff., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  103. OMB (US Off. Manag. Budg.) 2016. Strengthening federal statistics. Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2017, Analytical Perspectives. Washington, DC: US Gov. Print. Off. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2016/assets/ap_16_statistics.pdf [Google Scholar]
  104. Prewitt K. 2010. The Federal Statistical System: Its Vulnerability Matters More Than You Think Ann. Am. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 631. Los Angeles: Sage [Google Scholar]
  105. Prewitt K. 2013. What Is Your Race? The Census and Our Flawed Efforts to Classify Americans Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  106. Reamer AD. 2010. Surveying for Dollars: The Role of the American Community Survey in the Geographic Distribution of Federal Funds Washington, DC: Brookings Inst. http://www.brookings.edu/∼/media/Research/Files/Reports/2010/7/26%20acs%20reamer/0726_acs_reamer.PDF [Google Scholar]
  107. Robinson JG, Siegel JS. 1979. Illustrative assessment of the impact of census underenumeration and income underreporting on revenue sharing allocations at the local level. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1979 Proc. Soc. Stat. Sect.646–56 Alexandria, VA: Am. Stat. Assoc. [Google Scholar]
  108. Salvo JJ. 2012. Data capture. See Anderson et al. 2012 pp. 117–119 [Google Scholar]
  109. Siegel JS. 1975. Coverage of population in the 1970 census and some implications for public programs. Curr. Popul. Rep. Special Stud. P-23, No. 56, Bur. Census, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  110. Siegel JS, Passel JS, Rives NW Jr., Robinson JG. 1977. Developmental estimates of the coverage of the population of states in the 1970 census: demographic analysis Curr. Popul. Rep. Special Stud. P-23, No. 65, Bur. Census, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  111. Spencer BD. 1980a. Benefit-Cost Analysis of Data Used to Allocate Funds New York: Springer [Google Scholar]
  112. Spencer BD. 1980b. Implications of equity and accuracy for under-count adjustment: a decision-theoretic approach. Proc. 1980 Conf. Census Undercount204–16 Washington, DC: US Dep. Commer. Bur. Census [Google Scholar]
  113. Spencer BD. 1982. Feasibility of benefit-cost analysis of data programs. Eval. Rev. 6:649–72 [Google Scholar]
  114. Spencer BD. 1985a. Avoiding bias in estimates of the effect of data error on allocations of public funds. Eval. Rev. 9:511–18 [Google Scholar]
  115. Spencer BD. 1985b. Optimal data quality. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 80:564–73 [Google Scholar]
  116. Spencer BD. 1985c. Statistical aspects of equitable apportionment. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 80:815–22 [Google Scholar]
  117. Spencer BD. 1994. Sensitivity of benefit-cost analysis of data programs to monotone misspecification. J. Stat. Plan. Inference 39:119–31 [Google Scholar]
  118. Spencer BD. 1997. Statistics and Public Policy Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  119. Spencer B, Moses L. 1990. Needed data expenditure for an ambiguous decision problem. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 85:1099–104 [Google Scholar]
  120. Statistics Canada 1993. 75 Years and Counting: A History of Statistics Canada Ottawa, Can.: Statistics Canada [Google Scholar]
  121. Thieme M, Miller P. 2012. Launching adaptive design at the US Census Bureau Presented at Counc. Prof. Assoc. Fed. Stat., Dec. 7. http://www.copafs.org/meetings/December_2012.aspx [Google Scholar]
  122. Triplett J. 1991. The federal statistical system's response to emerging data needs. J. Econ. Soc. Meas. 17:3–4155–201 [Google Scholar]
  123. UN Statistical Commission 2014 (1994). Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics http://unstats.un.org/unsd/dnss/gp/FP-New-E.pdf [Google Scholar]
  124. US Census Bur. 1973. Population and housing inquiries in U.S. decennial censuses, 1790–1970. Work. Pap. 39, Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  125. US Census Bur. 1975. Historical Statistics of the United States Washington, DC: US Dep. Commer. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/publications/histstatus/hstat1970_cen_1975_v2.pdf [Google Scholar]
  126. Wells RV. 2012. Colonial censuses. See Anderson et al. 2012. 87–88
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-statistics-041715-033405
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-statistics-041715-033405
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error