Derivazioni: Space for communication by TANAKA Sigeto
[About] [Author] [Archive] [Mobile] [RSS]

 | | 

研究報告「「少子化」観の形成とその変化:1974年から現在まで」(2019-03-24 東京 <連続勉強会:「国難」のなかのわたしたちのからだ> 第2回)

報告資料: https://researchmap.jp/mukftmohn-58901

Date: 2019-03-24 (Sunday) 14:00-16:30
Location: 東京麻布台セミナーハウス (大阪経済法科大学) 2階大研修室
(http://www.keiho-u.ac.jp/research/asia-pacific/access.html)

Title: 「少子化」観の形成とその変化:1974年から現在まで

Author: 田中 重人 (東北大学)

※ 報告内容は、昨年12月8日の科学技術社会論学会報告 http://tsigeto.info/18v とあまり変わらないものになる予定です。

連続勉強会:「国難」のなかのわたしたちのからだ> 第2回 「少子化」論を問う: その変遷と科学言説の検証
https://remcat.hatenadiary.jp/entry/20190303/seminar2

Related articles


Preprint: Monthly Labour Survey Misconduct since at Least the 1990s (Tanaka S. 2019-03-05)

オンラインメディア『wezzy』記事 (2019-02-07)「「毎月勤労統計調査」は90年代以前から改ざんされていた? データ改ざんに甘い社会」をベースにした英語論文を公表しました。2001-2003にかけての誤差率の変動を分析したブログ記事 (2019-01-25)「捨てられていたサンプル: 毎月勤労統計調査2001-2003データの検証」の内容も付録としてつけてあります。

TANAKA Sigeto (2019-03-05) Monthly Labour Survey Misconduct since at Least the 1990s: Falsified Statistics in Japan. http://tsigeto.info/19m

This paper is based on a Japanese article published on an online media site wezzy. Its Appendix is based on a Japanese blog article by the author.

Abstract: The Monthly Labour Survey, which is one of the major economic statistics published by the Government of Japan, has been under criticism since January 2019 due to its negligent survey conduct and misinformation regarding its results. This paper approaches this scandal from a viewpoint of how the indicators of the quality of the survey were falsified and misreported. Based on published information regarding sample size and sampling errors, the author outlines three problems. (1) Since at least the 1990s, the survey’s sample size has been reported as larger than it actually was. (2) Since 2002, a significant portion of the sample has been secretly discarded. (3) Since 2004, the sampling error has been underreported by ignoring errors occurring in the strata of large establishments. These problems have escaped public attention as the government and academics are not critical of the falsification of basic information that determines the quality of the survey.

DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/2bf3z (on SocArXiv)

Related articles




Recent

Articles

Comments

Trackbacks


Archive

Monthly

Categories [Explanation]

| News:0 || Research:70 || Education:3 || School:267 || School/readu:3 || School/writing:17 || School/family:18 || School/occ:16 || School/quesu:6 || School/statu:4 || School/readg:18 || School/quesg:13 || School/statg:25 || School/kiso:5 || School/study:24 || School/intv:12 || School/book:0 || Profile:2 || WWW:7 || WWW/this:4 |