‘All Politics is Local’: Challenges in the Study of Local Jewish Communities

Abstract

Jews are a small proportion of the overall population and local community surveys are inherently challenging to conduct. Until recently, primary sample random digit dialing (RDD) surveys have been the preferred approach. But the proliferation of cellphones and declining response rates make RDD extremely expensive. The result is that communities who use RDD end up relying on small and/or biased samples. To overcome these challenges, the authors have developed a multi-method approach. It relies on cross-survey synthesis of extant RDD survey data that yields, along with significant cost savings, a more comprehensive sample. The approach also utilizes a broad list-based sample that goes beyond local federation lists and includes multiple other organizations. To maximize response rates, surveys are fielded both by phone and email. Finally, to correct for sample bias, adjustments are made using census-like data on organizational memberships and enrollments. In a series of four local Jewish community studies, the use of multiple methods has produced results that can be cross-validated against known data about the local Jewish community and known information that describes the local community context. Responding to the challenges posed by local Jewish community studies requires being transparent about the strengths and weaknesses of the methods used, while being responsive to the questions posed by communal sponsors.

A Canary in the AI Coal Mine: American Jews May Be Disproportionately Harmed by Intellectual Property Dispossession in Large Language Model Training

“…[113] As additional confirmation, we used Hartman and Sheskin's method to calculate an "expansion factor" based on the Pew 2013 6 Jewish population estimate [21] in conjunction with the U.S. Census's 2010 surname frequency data [20]. 7 We found that ∼9.15-11.18% of the U.S. Jewish population at the time was covered by the DJN frame, which is aligned with prior estimates.…”

“…In this paper, we focus on the American Jewish community, a small ethnoreligious group (about 1.8-2.4% of the U.S. population [22,106,107]) with a robust literature of community studies at local and federal levels (e.g., [21,27,57,77,111,114]). These studies are designed to capture the size, character, demographic profile, and needs of U.S. Jews and synthesize findings into actionable insights for the Jewish community [7]. However, the U.S. Census doesn't collect information on religion and the Jewish community is small enough to make identifying a representative sample via Random Digit Dialing (RDD) or other common random surveying approaches extremely costly [107].…”

“…6 We use the 2013 estimate rather than the 2020 estimate in order to align with Census data, of which 2010 is the latest available. 7 To do this, we counted the number of people with DJNs represented on the list, accounted for non-Jews with DJNs as described in 3.2.2, and compared the resulting number to the total number of Jews in the U.S. counted by Pew. not differ significantly in character from the former.…”

Jewish Community Studies in the Twenty-First Century

“…Aronson et al ( 2016 ) discussed using a nonprobability method that estimates the local population by extrapolating from national models, using little or no local survey responses . 1 They incorporate data from many respondents to national surveys, but restricted to those who say their religion is Judaism.…”

“…Phillips (2016) suggested respondent-driven sampling, but an attempt to implement that in Denver, Colorado in 2019 was not successful due to difficulty reaching out to initial contacts. Aronson et al (2016) discussed using a nonprobability method that estimates the local population by extrapolating from national models, using little or no local survey responses. 1 They incorporate data from many respondents to national surveys, but restricted to those who say their religion is Judaism.…”