Skip to main content

Improving Information for Social Policy Decisions -- The Uses of Microsimulation Modeling Volume II, Technical Papers (1991) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:


Pages 265-266

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 265...
... Consequently, there is little justification for a reviewer to believe the predictions of one model more than those of another. Haveman and Lacker recommended three approaches for investigating microsimulation models: backcasting, sensitivity analyses where certain modules would be switched between the models, and the analysis they performed for PRISM and DYNASIM.
Read the entire page →
From page 266...
... To understand the source of these differences, ICF examined the differences in the two models and found that a major difference is that the HITS M estimates were adjusted for underreporting of income in the CPS data while the TRIM2 estimates were not. Also, the models made use of different forms of imputation and statistical matching to augment the CPS.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • statistical match
  • sensitivity analysis
  • statistical matching
  • microsimulation models
  • simulation models

  • external validation
  • microsimulation model
  • participation function
  • benefit amount
  • benefit level

  • control totals
  • administrative data
  • cps data
  • sensitivity analyses
  • child care

  • control data
  • simulation model
  • current law
  • unit type
  • welfare reform


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.