A probability sampling method is any method of sampling that utilizes some form of random

selection. In order to have a random selection method, you must set up some process or
procedure that assures that the different units in your population have equal probabilities of
being chosen. Humans have long practiced various forms of random selection, such as picking
a name out of a hat, or choosing the short straw. These days, we tend to use computers as the
mechanism for generating random numbers as the basis for random selection.

Some Definitions
Before I can explain the various probability methods we have to define
some basic terms. These are:

 N = the number of cases in the sampling frame

 n = the number of cases in the sample
 NCn = the number of combinations (subsets) of n from N
 f = n/N = the sampling fraction

That's it. With those terms defined we can begin to define the different
probability sampling methods.

Simple Random Sampling

The simplest form of random sampling is called simple random
sampling. Pretty tricky, huh? Here's the quick description of simple
random sampling:

 Objective: To select n units out of N such that each NCn has an equal chance of

being selected.
 Procedure: Use a table of random numbers, a computer random number generator,
or a mechanical device to select the sample.
 A somewhat stilted, if accurate, definition. Let's see if we can make
it a little more real. How do we select a simple random sample?
Let's assume that we are doing some research with a small service
agency that wishes to assess clients' views of quality of service
over the past year. First, we have to get the sampling frame
organized. To accomplish this, we'll go through agency records to
 identify every client over the past 12 months. If we're lucky, the
agency has good accurate computerized records and can quickly
produce such a list. Then, we have to actually draw the sample.
Decide on the number of clients you would like to have in the final
sample. For the sake of the example, let's say you want to select
100 clients to survey and that there were 1000 clients over the past
12 months. Then, the sampling fraction is f = n/N = 100/1000 = .10
or 10%. Now, to actually draw the sample, you have several
options. You could print off the list of 1000 clients, tear then into
separate strips, put the strips in a hat, mix them up real good, close
your eyes and pull out the first 100. But this mechanical procedure
would be tedious and the quality of the sample would depend on
how thoroughly you mixed them up and how randomly you reached
in. Perhaps a better procedure would be to use the kind of ball
machine that is popular with many of the state lotteries. You would
need three sets of balls numbered 0 to 9, one set for each of the
digits from 000 to 999 (if we select 000 we'll call that 1000).
Number the list of names from 1 to 1000 and then use the ball
machine to select the three digits that selects each person. The
obvious disadvantage here is that you need to get the ball
machines. (Where do they make those things, anyway? Is there a
ball machine industry?).

 Neither of these mechanical procedures is very feasible and, with

the development of inexpensive computers there is a much easier
way. Here's a simple procedure that's especially useful if you have
the names of the clients already on the computer. Many computer
programs can generate a series of random numbers. Let's assume
you can copy and paste the list of client names into a column in an
EXCEL spreadsheet. Then, in the column right next to it paste the
function =RAND() which is EXCEL's way of putting a random
number between 0 and 1 in the cells. Then, sort both columns --
the list of names and the random number -- by the random
numbers. This rearranges the list in random order from the lowest
 to the highest random number. Then, all you have to do is take the
first hundred names in this sorted list. pretty simple. You could
probably accomplish the whole thing in under a minute.

 Simple random sampling is simple to accomplish and is easy to

explain to others. Because simple random sampling is a fair way to
select a sample, it is reasonable to generalize the results from the
sample back to the population. Simple random sampling is not the
most statistically efficient method of sampling and you may, just
because of the luck of the draw, not get good representation of
subgroups in a population. To deal with these issues, we have to
turn to other sampling methods.

 Stratified Random Sampling

 Stratified Random Sampling, also sometimes
called proportional or quota random sampling, involves dividing
your population into homogeneous subgroups and then taking a
simple random sample in each subgroup. In more formal terms:
 Objective: Divide the population into non-overlapping groups (i.e., strata) N1,
N2, N3, ... Ni, such that N1 + N2 + N3 + ... + Ni = N. Then do a simple random
sample of f = n/N in each strata.
 There are several major reasons why you might prefer stratified
sampling over simple random sampling. First, it assures that you
will be able to represent not only the overall population, but also
key subgroups of the population, especially small minority groups.
If you want to be able to talk about subgroups, this may be the only
way to effectively assure you'll be able to. If the subgroup is
extremely small, you can use different sampling fractions (f) within
the different strata to randomly over-sample the small group
(although you'll then have to weight the within-group estimates
using the sampling fraction whenever you want overall population
estimates). When we use the same sampling fraction within strata
we are conducting proportionate stratified random sampling. When
we use different sampling fractions in the strata, we call
 this disproportionate stratified random sampling. Second, stratified
random sampling will generally have more statistical precision than
simple random sampling. This will only be true if the strata or
groups are homogeneous. If they are, we expect that the variability
within-groups is lower than the variability for the population as a
whole. Stratified sampling capitalizes on that fact.
For example, let's say that the population of clients for our agency can be divided into three
groups: Caucasian, African-American and Hispanic-American. Furthermore, let's assume that
both the African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans are relatively small minorities of the
clientele (10% and 5% respectively). If we just did a simple random sample of n=100 with a
sampling fraction of 10%, we would expect by chance alone that we would only get 10 and 5
persons from each of our two smaller groups. And, by chance, we could get fewer than that! If
we stratify, we can do better. First, let's determine how many people we want to have in each
group. Let's say we still want to take a sample of 100 from the population of 1000 clients over
the past year. But we think that in order to say anything about subgroups we will need at least
25 cases in each group. So, let's sample 50 Caucasians, 25 African-Americans, and 25
Hispanic-Americans. We know that 10% of the population, or 100 clients, are African-American.
If we randomly sample 25 of these, we have a within-stratum sampling fraction of 25/100 =
25%. Similarly, we know that 5% or 50 clients are Hispanic-American. So our within-stratum
sampling fraction will be 25/50 = 50%. Finally, by subtraction we know that there are 850
Caucasian clients. Our within-stratum sampling fraction for them is 50/850 = about 5.88%.
Because the groups are more homogeneous within-group than across the population as a
whole, we can expect greater statistical precision (less variance). And, because we stratified,
we know we will have enough cases from each group to make meaningful subgroup inferences.

Systematic Random Sampling

Here are the steps you need to follow in order to achieve a systematic
random sample:

 number the units in the population from 1 to N

 decide on the n (sample size) that you want or need
 k = N/n = the interval size
 randomly select an integer between 1 to k
 then take every kth unit
 All of this will
be much
clearer with
an example.
Let's assume
that we have
a population
that only has
N=100 people
in it and that
you want to
take a sample
of n=20. To
use
systematic sampling, the population must be listed in a random order.
The sampling fraction would be f = 20/100 = 20%. in this case, the
interval size, k, is equal to N/n = 100/20 = 5. Now, select a random
integer from 1 to 5. In our example, imagine that you chose 4. Now, to
select the sample, start with the 4th unit in the list and take every k-th
unit (every 5th, because k=5). You would be sampling units 4, 9, 14, 19,
and so on to 100 and you would wind up with 20 units in your sample.

For this to work, it is essential that the units in the population are
randomly ordered, at least with respect to the characteristics you are
measuring. Why would you ever want to use systematic random
sampling? For one thing, it is fairly easy to do. You only have to select a
single random number to start things off. It may also be more precise
than simple random sampling. Finally, in some situations there is simply
no easier way to do random sampling. For instance, I once had to do a
study that involved sampling from all the books in a library. Once
selected, I would have to go to the shelf, locate the book, and record
when it last circulated. I knew that I had a fairly good sampling frame in
the form of the shelf list (which is a card catalog where the entries are
arranged in the order they occur on the shelf). To do a simple random
sample, I could have estimated the total number of books and generated
random numbers to draw the sample; but how would I find book #74,329
easily if that is the number I selected? I couldn't very well count the cards
until I came to 74,329! Stratifying wouldn't solve that problem either. For
instance, I could have stratified by card catalog drawer and drawn a
simple random sample within each drawer. But I'd still be stuck counting
cards. Instead, I did a systematic random sample. I estimated the
number of books in the entire collection. Let's imagine it was 100,000. I
decided that I wanted to take a sample of 1000 for a sampling fraction of
1000/100,000 = 1%. To get the sampling interval k, I divided N/n =
100,000/1000 = 100. Then I selected a random integer between 1 and
100. Let's say I got 57. Next I did a little side study to determine how
thick a thousand cards are in the card catalog (taking into account the
varying ages of the cards). Let's say that on average I found that two
cards that were separated by 100 cards were about .75 inches apart in
the catalog drawer. That information gave me everything I needed to
draw the sample. I counted to the 57th by hand and recorded the book
information. Then, I took a compass. (Remember those from your high-
school math class? They're the funny little metal instruments with a
sharp pin on one end and a pencil on the other that you used to draw
circles in geometry class.) Then I set the compass at .75", stuck the pin
end in at the 57th card and pointed with the pencil end to the next card
(approximately 100 books away). In this way, I approximated selecting
the 157th, 257th, 357th, and so on. I was able to accomplish the entire
selection procedure in very little time using this systematic random
sampling approach. I'd probably still be there counting cards if I'd tried
another random sampling method. (Okay, so I have no life. I got
compensated nicely, I don't mind saying, for coming up with this
scheme.)

Cluster (Area) Random Sampling

The problem with random sampling methods when we have to sample a
population that's disbursed across a wide geographic region is that you
will have to cover a lot of ground geographically in order to get to each of
the units you sampled. Imagine taking a simple random sample of all the
residents of New York State in order to conduct personal interviews. By
the luck of the draw you will wind up with respondents who come from all
over the state. Your interviewers are going to have a lot of traveling to
do. It is for precisely this problem that cluster or area random
sampling was invented.

In cluster sampling, we follow these steps:

 divide population into clusters (usually along geographic boundaries)

 randomly sample clusters
 measure all units within sampled clusters

For instance,
in the figure
we see a map
of the
counties in
New York
State. Let's
say that we
have to do a
survey of
town
governments
that will
require us
going to the
towns
personally. If we do a simple random sample state-wide we'll have to
cover the entire state geographically. Instead, we decide to do a cluster
sampling of five counties (marked in red in the figure). Once these are
selected, we go to every town government in the five areas. Clearly this
strategy will help us to economize on our mileage. Cluster or area
sampling, then, is useful in situations like this, and is done primarily for
efficiency of administration. Note also, that we probably don't have to
worry about using this approach if we are conducting a mail or telephone
survey because it doesn't matter as much (or cost more or raise
inefficiency) where we call or send letters to.

Multi-Stage Sampling
The four methods we've covered so far -- simple, stratified, systematic
and cluster -- are the simplest random sampling strategies. In most real
applied social research, we would use sampling methods that are
considerably more complex than these simple variations. The most
important principle here is that we can combine the simple methods
described earlier in a variety of useful ways that help us address our
sampling needs in the most efficient and effective manner possible.
When we combine sampling methods, we call this multi-stage
sampling.

For example, consider the idea of sampling New York State residents for
face-to-face interviews. Clearly we would want to do some type of cluster
sampling as the first stage of the process. We might sample townships
or census tracts throughout the state. But in cluster sampling we would
then go on to measure everyone in the clusters we select. Even if we are
sampling census tracts we may not be able to measure everyone who is
in the census tract. So, we might set up a stratified sampling process
within the clusters. In this case, we would have a two-stage sampling
process with stratified samples within cluster samples. Or, consider the
problem of sampling students in grade schools. We might begin with a
national sample of school districts stratified by economics and
educational level. Within selected districts, we might do a simple random
sample of schools. Within schools, we might do a simple random sample
of classes or grades. And, within classes, we might even do a simple
random sample of students. In this case, we have three or four stages in
the sampling process and we use both stratified and simple random
sampling. By combining different sampling methods we are able to
achieve a rich variety of probabilistic sampling methods that can be used
in a wide range of social research contexts.