I am currently working on a random intercept multilevel model using the European Social Survey round 6 dataset. It is a 2-level model with individuals (level 1) nested within countries (level 2). To simplify things, let's look at the following regression:

$Y_{ij}=\beta_{0j}+\beta_{1j}X_{ij}+e_{ij}$

where the dependent variable is **trust in the European Parliament** on a scale from 0-10, and the level-1 predictor is **gender**. In the data set, two weights exists:

 - _Design weight_: The design weights are inclusion probabilities for individuals $i$ in countries $j$. The design weight corrects for slightly different probabilities of selection, thereby making the sample more representative of a ‘true’ sample of individuals from each country.
 - _Population size weights_: The population size weight makes an adjustment to ensure that each country is represented in proportion to its population size. The population size weight is calculated as PWEIGHT= [Population size]/[(Net sample size in data file)*10 000]

My question is: do I need to specify the population size weights when I run the multilevel model? I clearly get different results. Below is the regression only using design weights (I am using Stata):

    . xtmixed trstep gndr [pw = dweight]|| land:, mle var 
    
    Obtaining starting values by EM: 
    
    Performing gradient-based optimization: 
    
    Iteration 0:   log pseudolikelihood =  -92442,22  
    Iteration 1:   log pseudolikelihood =  -92442,22  (backed up)
    
    Computing standard errors:
    
    Mixed-effects regression                        Number of obs      =     39923
    Group variable: land                            Number of groups   =        24
    
                                                    Obs per group: min =       579
                                                                   avg =    1663,5
                                                                   max =      2711
    
    
                                                    Wald chi2(1)       =      5,91
    Log pseudolikelihood =  -92442,22               Prob > chi2        =    0,0151
    
                                      (Std. Err. adjusted for 24 clusters in land)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 |               Robust
          trstep |      Coef.   Std. Err.      z    P>|z|     [95% Conf. Interval]
    -------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
            gndr |   ,1147821   ,0472334     2,43   0,015     ,0222063    ,2073578
           _cons |   4,144926    ,117911    35,15   0,000     3,913825    4,376027
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 |               Robust           
      Random-effects Parameters  |   Estimate   Std. Err.     [95% Conf. Interval]
    -----------------------------+------------------------------------------------
    land: Identity               |
                      var(_cons) |   ,3184852   ,0689119      ,2084065    ,4867066
    -----------------------------+------------------------------------------------
                   var(Residual) |    5,93535   ,2514202      5,462477    6,449158
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And here is the regression using both design weights, population size weights and scaling:


    . xtmixed trstep gndr [pw = dweight]|| land:, mle var pweight(pweight) pwscale(size)
    
    Obtaining starting values by EM: 
    
    Performing gradient-based optimization: 
    
    Iteration 0:   log pseudolikelihood = -81334,099  
    Iteration 1:   log pseudolikelihood =  -81333,24  
    Iteration 2:   log pseudolikelihood =  -81333,24  
    
    Computing standard errors:
    
    Mixed-effects regression                        Number of obs      =     39923
    Group variable: land                            Number of groups   =        24
    
                                                    Obs per group: min =       579
                                                                   avg =    1663,5
                                                                   max =      2711
    
    
                                                    Wald chi2(1)       =     10,73
    Log pseudolikelihood =  -81333,24               Prob > chi2        =    0,0011
    
                                      (Std. Err. adjusted for 24 clusters in land)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 |               Robust
          trstep |      Coef.   Std. Err.      z    P>|z|     [95% Conf. Interval]
    -------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
            gndr |   ,1680609   ,0513105     3,28   0,001     ,0674942    ,2686276
           _cons |   3,745146   ,1854299    20,20   0,000      3,38171    4,108582
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 |               Robust           
      Random-effects Parameters  |   Estimate   Std. Err.     [95% Conf. Interval]
    -----------------------------+------------------------------------------------
    land: Identity               |
                      var(_cons) |   ,2645594   ,0598105      ,1698583     ,412059
    -----------------------------+------------------------------------------------
                   var(Residual) |   6,070198   ,3532338      5,415894    6,803549
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I can't figure out how the population weights influence the ML estimates. In the official documentation for ESS, they write the following:

> When comparing data from two or more countries but without reference
> to the average (or combined total) of those countries, only the design
> weight need be applied. When comparing data of two or more countries
> and with reference to the average (or combined total) of those
> countries, both design and population size weights should be applied. ([ESS Documentation][1])

The question is, whether I actually just compare countries, or compare them to an overall mean. The latter seems for me to be correct, as the parameter estimates actually relate to the overall mean $\mu_{00}$. But I may be wrong. The Stata manual has an extensive section on weighting [here][2] but it did not clear things up for me. Any suggestions?


  [1]: http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/docs/methodology/ESS_weighting_data.pdf
  [2]: http://www.stata.com/bookstore/stata12/pdf/xt_xtmixed.pdf#page=41