IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eecrev/v63y2013icp299-307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How survey design affects self-assessed health responses in the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE)

Author

Listed:
  • Lumsdaine, Robin L.
  • Exterkate, Anneke

Abstract

This paper considers the role of question order and framing in evaluating subjective health assessment responses using the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) dataset. In the first wave of this dataset respondents were twice asked to evaluate their health on a five-point scale, using two different sets of descriptors to define the five points, with the ordering of which set was first administered determined randomly. We document differences in inference in comparing those that were asked one question first versus those that were asked the other. We then consider determinants of the degree of concordance in responses to the two questions, as well as the characteristics of individuals that provide conflicting responses. Consistent with previous research for England (Bowling and Windsor, 2008. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 62, 81–85), there is evidence for eleven countries in Europe that individuals’ assessments of their health in response to the second question may be influenced by the battery of health questions that were asked following the first assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Lumsdaine, Robin L. & Exterkate, Anneke, 2013. "How survey design affects self-assessed health responses in the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE)," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 299-307.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:63:y:2013:i:c:p:299-307
    DOI: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2013.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292113000755
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2013.06.002?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susann Rohwedder & Steven J. Haider & Michael D. Hurd, 2006. "INCREASES IN WEALTH AMONG THE ELDERLY IN THE EARLY 1990s: HOW MUCH IS DUE TO SURVEY DESIGN?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 52(4), pages 509-524, December.
    2. Teresa Bago d’Uva & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O’Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2011. "Slipping Anchor?: Testing the Vignettes Approach to Identification and Correction of Reporting Heterogeneity," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 46(4), pages 875-906.
    3. Lindeboom, Maarten & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2004. "Cut-point shift and index shift in self-reported health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 1083-1099, November.
    4. Crossley, Thomas F. & Kennedy, Steven, 2002. "The reliability of self-assessed health status," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 643-658, July.
    5. Erik Meijer & Arie Kapteyn & Tatiana Andreyeva, 2011. "Internationally comparable health indices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(5), pages 600-619, May.
    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. Davillas, Apostolos & de Oliveira, Victor Hugo & Jones, Andrew M., 2023. "Is inconsistent reporting of self-assessed health persistent and systematic? Evidence from the UKHLS," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Kim, Y-S. & Lee, M-J., 2016. "Generalized Difference in Differences for Ordinal Responses with a Varying Number of Categories," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 16/19, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    3. Black, Nicole & Johnston, David W. & Shields, Michael A. & Suziedelyte, Agne, 2017. "Who provides inconsistent reports of their health status? The importance of age, cognitive ability and socioeconomic status," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 9-18.
    4. Black, Nicole & Johnston, David W. & Suziedelyte, Agne, 2017. "Justification bias in self-reported disability: New evidence from panel data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 124-134.
    5. Kools, Lieke & Knoef, Marike, 2019. "Health and consumption preferences; estimating the health state dependence of utility using equivalence scales," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 46-62.
    6. Reisinger, James, 2022. "Subjective well-being and social desirability," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).

    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. Chiara Dal Bianco, 2023. "Disability Insurance and the Effects of Return-to-work Policies," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 49, pages 351-373, July.
    2. Dal Bianco, Chiara, 2022. "Disability Insurance and the Effects of Return-to-Work Policies," SocArXiv pj8d9_v1, Center for Open Science.
    3. Juergen Jung, 2022. "Estimating transition probabilities between health states using US longitudinal survey data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 901-943, August.
    4. Mozhaeva, Irina, 2022. "Inequalities in utilization of institutional care among older people in Estonia," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(7), pages 704-714.
    5. Anneke Exterkate & Robin L. Lumsdaine, 2011. "How Survey Design Affects Inference Regarding Health Perceptions and Outcomes," NBER Working Papers 17244, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. David Cantarero & Marta Pascual, 2005. "Regional Differences In Health In Spain - An Empirical Analysis," ERSA conference papers ersa05p551, European Regional Science Association.
    7. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13753 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. van Ooijen, R. & Alessi, R. & Knoef, M., 2015. "Health status over the life cycle," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 15/21, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    9. Laura Rossouw, 2015. "Poor Health Reporting: Do Poor South Africans Underestimate Their Health Needs?," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2015-027, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. Gimenez-Nadal, J. Ignacio & Molina, Jose Alberto, 2015. "Health status and the allocation of time: Cross-country evidence from Europe," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 188-203.
    11. Fabrice Etilé & Carine Milcent, 2006. "Income‐related reporting heterogeneity in self‐assessed health: evidence from France," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(9), pages 965-981, September.
    12. Davillas, Apostolos & de Oliveira, Victor Hugo & Jones, Andrew M., 2023. "Is inconsistent reporting of self-assessed health persistent and systematic? Evidence from the UKHLS," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    13. Erik Meijer & Arie Kapteyn & Tatiana Andreyeva, 2008. "Health Indexes and Retirement Modeling in International Comparisons," Working Papers 614, RAND Corporation.
    14. Florence Jusot & Sabine Mage & Marta Menendez, 2014. "Inequality of Opportunity in Health in Indonesia," Working Papers DT/2014/06, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    15. Ivan Cipin & Sime Smolic, 2013. "Socio-Economic Determinants of Health in Croatia: Insights from Four Cross-Sectional Surveys," Croatian Economic Survey, The Institute of Economics, Zagreb, vol. 15(1), pages 25-60, April.
    16. Raskina, Yulia & Podkorytova, Olga & Kuchakov, Ruslan, 2022. "Health determinants and the reporting heterogeneity bias in Russia: Anchoring vignettes approach," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 66, pages 118-143.
    17. 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.
    18. Nicolas R. Ziebarth, 2018. "Social Insurance and Health," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Health Econometrics, volume 127, pages 57-84, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    19. Jiayi Wen & Zixi Ye & Xuan Zhang, 2024. "A New Testing Method for Justification Bias Using High-Frequency Data of Health and Employment," Papers 2403.06368, arXiv.org.
    20. Danilo Cavapozzi & Chiara Dal Bianco, "undated". "The effect of work disability on the intention to retire of older workers," Working Papers 2018:26, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    21. Mayu Fujii & Takashi Oshio & Satoshi Shimizutani, 2014. "Self-rated Health Status of Japanese and Europeans in Later Life: Evidence from JSTAR and SHARE," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 65(4), pages 483-498, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Concordance; Survey bias; Subjective response; Question order;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health

    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:eecrev:v:63:y:2013:i:c:p:299-307. 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/eer .

    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.