06 Aug

Let’s have a data party

Last year I wrote a blog post about triangulating different data sources. I used the example of mobile phone ownership and the ITU, Caucasus Barometer, and Gallup. In that post I said:

“The point I’d like to make is that these statistics are complicated and it is hard to get at the “right” number. That’s why we try to triangulate — look at different sources of data to see if things seem right. We also should always assess the credibility of the source of the data.

Data sources:

ITU is the UN’s official statistics and these numbers come from the governments themselves who usually get the numbers from the telecommunications companies. These companies count number of SIM cards sold and it is not unusual for people to have multiple SIM cards. This is data to be highly skeptical about. For the question about mobile penetration, this isn’t actually percent, it is number of mobile phones per 100 people.

Caucasus Barometer, Gallup, and EBRD are surveys taken face-to-face in households. All use different sampling techniques and are collected by different organizations. None are perfect, but they’re as good as we’ve got. Of the three, I trust Gallup the least.

Noteworthy:
All of these were collected at different times of the year.

Margin of error varies in all of these.

A ~4-6 point difference is within the margin of error and shouldn’t be looked at with too much suspicion.”

With those same rules applying, here are some results from different sources from Azerbaijan.

inetown

mobileown

pcown

For what it is worth, I LOVE having more data. The more data we have measuring similar things, the more sure we can be of the results. 2010 is a great year here because of the 4 data sources (for some questions). But please, reach your own conclusions about what the “correct” percentage is.

PS, I hate penetration rates.

PPS, here is a similar comparison of Armenia’s statistics from a few years ago. And here’s one for Armenia specifically on mobile comparison.

23 Nov

I Got 99 Problems, But Statistical Triangulation Ain’t One

I often have conversations with people about Internet penetration rates.

The point I’d like to make is that these statistics are complicated and it is hard to get at the “right” number. That’s why we try to triangulate — look at different sources of data to see if things seem right. We also should always assess the credibility of the source of the data.

For this example I chose mobile phone penetration.

Data sources:

ITU is the UN’s official statistics and these numbers come from the governments themselves who usually get the numbers from the telecommunications companies. These companies count number of SIM cards sold and it is not unusual for people to have multiple SIM cards. This is data to be highly skeptical about.

Caucasus Barometer, Gallup, and EBRD are surveys taken face-to-face in households. All use different sampling techniques and are collected by different organizations. None are perfect, but they’re as good as we’ve got. Of the three, I trust Gallup the least.

Noteworthy:
All of these were collected at different times of the year.

Margin of error varies in all of these.

A ~4-6 point difference is within the margin of error and shouldn’t be looked at with too much suspicion.

So what do we see?

– Look at the huge difference between the ITU and the Caucasus Barometer in all three countries in 2004.
– 2006 is a little better, but Georgia’s a little too far off to be left to chance.
– 2007 is a little questionable in both Armenia and Azerbaijan.
– 2008 is really off in Armenia and not great in Azerbaijan.
– 2009 isn’t bad.
– 2010 is all over the place. My thought is that by the time you’d are at more than three-quarters of households having phones, the ones that don’t are also probably the ones that are less likely be be surveyed – the poorest of the poor, for example.
– The 2011 difference between the CB and the ITU is likely due to SIM counting. While a household may own a phone, they may have a lot of SIMs too.

10 Oct

Mobiles Galore!

There are a lot of mobile communication opportunities right now.

First, the new SAGE journal Mobile Media & Communication is launching in January and is currently accepting submissions.

My favorite conference every year is the mobile preconference at ICA. The mobile comm community is full of great people and for me, at least, it feels the most like home in terms of academic subdisciplines. ICA 2013 is in London, which makes it even more exciting. The preconference call for papers is up. Abstracts are due on November 16. (Most ICA submissions are full papers, so an abstract-only is a nice incentive!)

Another conference that popped up this week is the Mobile Telephony in the Developing World conference in Finland. This too requires an abstract, by November 30.

I’m teaching both an undergraduate and a graduate mobile comm course this quarter, so I feel like I am surrounded by mobiles right now!

05 Dec

Regional differences in mean of accessing the Internet

Based on data from the Armenian Media landscape report, here are the regional breakdowns of means of accessing the Internet in Armenia (in early 2011).

You can see that for the country as a whole, most Internet users are personal computer based – although mobile is not insignificant. In the capital, PC dominates, but for rural users, mobile is catching up to PC. And those mobile users are often NEW users.

In an upcoming study we discuss how much the way people access the Internet influences what they actually do once they’re online as well as the demographic differences between those that use a PC and those that use a mobile phone as their primary Internet access device.

This is the entire country.

This is Yerevan.

This is regional cities.

This is rural areas.

(All images by Janine Slaker)

 OF ALL ARMENIAN INTERNET USERS

Total

Yerevan

Regional city

Rural

N = 420

N = 215

N = 145

N = 60

Mobile Internet access

15%

10%

19%

28%

PC-based Internet access

71%

73%

77%

62%

Both mobile and
PC based Internet access

11%

17%

4%

10%

 OF ALL ARMENIANS

Total

Yerevan

Regional city

Rural

N = 1420

N = 504

N = 443

N = 473

No Internet access 70%

57%

67%

87%

Mobile Internet access

5%

4%

6%

4%

PC-based Internet access

22%

31%

25%

8%

Both mobile and
PC based Internet access

3%

7%

1%

1%