IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v201y2021ics0165176521000549.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification of attrition bias using different types of panel refreshments

Author

Listed:
  • Chadi, Adrian

Abstract

Selective attrition out of longitudinal datasets is a concern for empirical researchers. This note illustrates a simple way to identify potential attrition bias in panel surveys by exploiting multiple types of simultaneous entries into a panel survey. The little-known phenomenon of natural refreshments, which adds to entries through refreshments induced by data collectors, allows for attrition bias to be disentangled from measurement errors connected to differences in participation experience (i.e. panel conditioning). A demonstrative application on subjective data from the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) serves as an example and offers insights on health- and happiness-related attrition in panel surveys.

Suggested Citation

  • Chadi, Adrian, 2021. "Identification of attrition bias using different types of panel refreshments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:201:y:2021:i:c:s0165176521000549
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2021.109777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176521000549
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2021.109777?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adrian Chadi, 2019. "Dissatisfied with life or with being interviewed? Happiness and the motivation to participate in a survey," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 519-553, October.
    2. Van Landeghem, Bert, 2014. "A test based on panel refreshments for panel conditioning in stated utility measures," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 236-238.
    3. James J. Heckman, 1976. "The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for Such Models," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 5, number 4, pages 475-492, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Das, J.W.M. & van Soest, A.H.O. & Toepoel, V., 2011. "Nonparametric tests of panel conditioning and attrition bias in panel surveys," Other publications TiSEM 76b0a827-e4b6-403d-8465-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Olsen, Randall J, 1980. "A Least Squares Correction for Selectivity Bias," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(7), pages 1815-1820, November.
    6. Paul Contoyannis & Andrew M. Jones & Nigel Rice, 2004. "The dynamics of health in the British Household Panel Survey," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 473-503.
    7. Andrew Halpern-Manners & John Warren, 2012. "Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Studies: Evidence From Labor Force Items in the Current Population Survey," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 49(4), pages 1499-1519, November.
    8. Wunder, Christoph & Heineck, Guido, 2013. "Working time preferences, hours mismatch and well-being of couples: Are there spillovers?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 244-252.
    9. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder & Donald B. Rubin, 2001. "Combining Panel Data Sets with Attrition and Refreshment Samples," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1645-1659, November.
    10. Marcel Das & Vera Toepoel & Arthur van Soest, 2011. "Nonparametric Tests of Panel Conditioning and Attrition Bias in Panel Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(1), pages 32-56, February.
    11. W. Maennig & M. Steenbeck & M. Wilhelm, 2014. "Rhythms and cycles in happiness," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(1), pages 70-78, January.
    12. Andrew M. Jones & Xander Koolman & Nigel Rice, 2006. "Health‐related non‐response in the British Household Panel Survey and European Community Household Panel: using inverse‐probability‐weighted estimators in non‐linear models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 543-569, July.
    13. Gabriella Conti & Stephen Pudney, 2011. "Survey Design and the Analysis of Satisfaction," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(3), pages 1087-1093, August.
    14. Georgios Kavetsos & Marika Dimitriadou & Paul Dolan, 2014. "Measuring happiness: context matters," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(5), pages 308-311, March.
    15. Chadi, Adrian, 2013. "The role of interviewer encounters in panel responses on life satisfaction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 550-554.
    16. Felderer, Barbara & Müller, Gerrit & Kreuter, Frauke & Winter, Joachim, 2018. "The Effect of Differential Incentives on Attrition Bias: Evidence from the PASS Wave 3 Incentive Experiment," Munich Reprints in Economics 62837, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    17. Kassenboehmer, Sonja C. & Haisken-DeNew, John P., 2012. "Heresy or enlightenment? The well-being age U-shape effect is flat," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 235-238.
    18. Gert G. Wagner & Joachim R. Frick & Jürgen Schupp, 2007. "The German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) – Scope, Evolution and Enhancements," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 127(1), pages 139-169.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephan Huber & Jochen Model & Silvio Städter, 2019. "Ostracism in alliances of teams and individuals: Voting, exclusion, contribution, and earnings," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201901, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).
    2. Oliwia Komada & Pawel Strzelecki & Joanna Tyrowicz, 2019. "A regression discontinuity evaluation of reducing early retirement eligibility in Poland," International Journal of Manpower, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 40(2), pages 286-303, February.
    3. Laszlo Goerke, 2018. "Sickness Absence and Relative Income," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201812, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).
    4. Krzysztof Makarski & Joanna Tyrowicz & Magda Malec, 2018. "Evaluating welfare and economic effects of raised fertility," GRAPE Working Papers 25, GRAPE Group for Research in Applied Economics.
    5. Laszlo Goerke, 2019. "Corporate social responsibility and tax avoidance," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 21(2), pages 310-331, April.
    6. Adrian Chadi, 2019. "Dissatisfied with life or with being interviewed? Happiness and the motivation to participate in a survey," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 519-553, October.
    7. Alberto Palermo & Clemens Buchen & Bruno Deffains, 2018. "Stigmatization, Liability and Public Enforcement of Law," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201811, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).
    8. Florian Hett & Markus Kroell & Mario Mechtel, 2019. "The Structure and Behavioral Effects of Revealed Social Identity Preferences," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201903, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adrian Chadi, 2019. "Dissatisfied with life or with being interviewed? Happiness and the motivation to participate in a survey," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 519-553, October.
    2. Bert Van Landeghem, 2012. "Panel Conditioning and Self-Reported Satisfaction: Evidence from International Panel Data and Repeated Cross-Sections," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 484, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    3. Schwandt, Hannes, 2016. "Unmet aspirations as an explanation for the age U-shape in wellbeing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 75-87.
    4. Chadi, Adrian, 2015. "Concerns about the Euro and happiness in Germany during times of crisis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PA), pages 126-146.
    5. Van Landeghem, Bert, 2019. "Stable traits but unstable measures? Identifying panel effects in self-reflective survey questions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 83-95.
    6. Nikolova, Elena & Sanfey, Peter, 2016. "How much should we trust life satisfaction data? Evidence from the Life in Transition Survey," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 720-731.
    7. Ádám Stefkovics & Endre Sik, 2022. "What Drives Happiness? The Interviewer’s Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 2745-2762, August.
    8. Adrian Chadi & Clemens Hetschko, 2021. "How Job Changes Affect People's Lives — Evidence from Subjective Well‐Being Data," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 59(2), pages 279-306, June.
    9. Chadi, Adrian, 2013. "The role of interviewer encounters in panel responses on life satisfaction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 550-554.
    10. Van Landeghem, Bert, 2014. "A test based on panel refreshments for panel conditioning in stated utility measures," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 236-238.
    11. Rene Segers & Philip Hans Franses, 2014. "Panel design effects on response rates and response quality," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 68(1), pages 1-24, February.
    12. Binder, Martin & Coad, Alex, 2013. "“I'm afraid I have bad news for you…” Estimating the impact of different health impairments on subjective well-being," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 155-167.
    13. Sarah Brown & Jennifer Roberts & Karl Taylor, 2010. "Reservation wages, labour market participation and health," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 173(3), pages 501-529, July.
    14. Chadi, Adrian, 2013. "Third Person Effects in Interview Responses on Life Satisfaction," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 133(2), pages 323-333.
    15. Adrian Chadi & Clemens Hetschko, 2018. "The magic of the new: How job changes affect job satisfaction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 23-39, March.
    16. Mine Kühn & Christian Dudel & Tobias C. Vogt & Anna Oksuzyan, 2017. "Trends in gender differences in health and mortality at working ages among West and East Germans," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2017-009, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    17. Bach, Ruben L. & Eckman, Stephanie, 2017. "Does participating in a panel survey change respondents' labor market behavior?," IAB-Discussion Paper 201715, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    18. Mark Wooden & Ning Li, 2014. "Panel Conditioning and Subjective Well-being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 235-255, May.
    19. Adrian Chadi & Clemens Hetschko, 2017. "Income or Leisure? On the Hidden Benefits of (Un-) Employment," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201706, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).
    20. Bert Van Landeghem & Anneleen Vandeplas, 2016. "Lower in rank, but happier: the complex relationship between status and happiness," Working Papers of LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance 556194, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-response; Refreshment samples; Household survey; Panel conditioning; Subjective health; Life satisfaction;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
    • C8 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • I3 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:201:y:2021:i:c:s0165176521000549. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.