Weighting Best Practices

In our previous post on sampling best practices, we mentioned weighting is sometimes an option to bring sample imbalances in line under certain circumstances. While data is typically weighted to match sample specifications that are not achieved naturally, weighting is NOT a replacement for appropriate sampling.

Some benefits of weighting include:

  • Helping a sample to be more representative of the population.
  • Adjusting for different response rates.
  • Allowing comparisons across samples. It is important in tracking that differences detected are true differences rather than driven by different types of respondents in the sample.
  • Sometimes, appropriate data weighting can be more cost-effective than obtaining a representative sample.

The number of respondents does not change when weights are applied. Some people’s responses simply carry more weight than others. We assign a weight to each respondent; some respondents are weighted up and others are weighted down to reflect desired proportions. For simple weighting schemes, weights are calculated by dividing the target % (representative proportion in the population) by the actual % (sampled).



Target %


Actual %


Weight Factor

(Target / Actual)

North Region




East  Region




South Region




West Region








There are two main types of Weighting: Target and Rim. Target weighting, also called Cell Matching, is appropriate for a simple weighting scheme, and is based on one variable. This single variable, however, can be nested (e.g., education within gender). The weights can be calculated manually as shown in the table above.

RIM weighting, sometimes called Raking, is appropriate for more complex weighting schemes with two or more variables. RIM weighting calculates weight factors (via data processing software) by iteratively adjusting weights to align with one variable’s targets, then for another, etc., until an adequate solution is found that brings all variables into line with their respective targets. RIM weighting uses non-nested variables, therefore, knowledge of the relationship between variables (e.g., education within gender) is not required. RIM weighting results may also be more stable than using nested variables when sample sizes are small.

Appropriate actions should be taken to sample the population correctly, and only weight results when necessary. ENGINE has the expertise to guide when weighting is appropriate and walk you through the steps to ensure data remains representative of the population of interest.

Written by Sheilah Wagner, Research Director at ENGINE Insights.

Share on linkedin
Share on twitter
Share on facebook


Vashti Chatman, Chief Talent Officer at ENGINE US

ENGINE Names Vashti Chatman Chief Talent Officer

NEW YORK, September 8th, 2021 – ENGINE, a global, full-service media and marketing services company, announced today that Vashti Chatman has been named Chief Talent Officer, ENGINE US, effective immediately. She is charged with leading the Human Resources team in the US and will work as a strategic partner with ENGINE’s Global CEO, Kasha Cacy, focusing on policies, people, culture, and workplace strategies. She reports directly to Cacy and is a member of ENGINE’s Executive Team.

ENGINE + Credible

ENGINE Signs Credible, Leading Consumer Finance Marketplace

New York, March 30th, 2021 – ENGINE, a global full-service media and marketing services company, announced today it has signed Credible as a client. Credible ( is a leading consumer finance marketplace that enables consumers to compare instant, accurate prequalified rates from multiple financial institutions for mortgages, student loans and personal loans.


Start typing and press Enter to search