IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joepsy/v72y2019icp83-95.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stable traits but unstable measures? Identifying panel effects in self-reflective survey questions

Author

Listed:
  • Van Landeghem, Bert

Abstract

Economists and psychologists often measure aspects such as utility, preferences, and personality traits through self-assessment modules in longitudinal household surveys. This paper investigates to what extent such measures are subject to a panel effect or panel conditioning, that is, whether people answer the questions differently the more experience they have answering such questions. First, the paper makes a more general contribution to the literature on panel effects and makes explicit identification issues that arise in different types of empirical strategies. Next, the empirical analysis exploits a design feature of the UK Household Longitudinal Survey that introduces random variation in survey experience within a calendar year. The analysis first confirms the existence of such a panel effect in general life satisfaction, a pattern previously established in other data with a slightly different identification strategy. The data also provide evidence of panel effects in domain satisfactions, although these are less straightforward to interpret. This finding is important if researchers consider repeated measurements of such traits in household surveys to investigate their stability over time for a society or for an individual: the paper illustrates how conclusions on time trends in the subjective data for this case study are influenced if panel effects are ignored.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:72:y:2019:i:c:p:83-95
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2019.02.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487016305712
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joep.2019.02.006?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. Conchita D’Ambrosio & Joachim Frick, 2007. "Income Satisfaction and Relative Deprivation: An Empirical Link," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 81(3), pages 497-519, May.
    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. Kremer, Michael R. & Karlan, D. S. & Hornbeck, Richard A. & Gine, X. & Duflo, E. & Pariente, W. & Null, C. & Miguel, E. & Devoto, F. & Crepon, B. & Banerjee, A. & Zwane, A. P. & Zinman, J. & Van Dusen, 2011. "Being Surveyed Can Change Later Behavior and Related Parameter Estimates," Scholarly Articles 11339433, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    4. 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.
    5. Thomas F. Crossley & Jochem Bresser & Liam Delaney & Joachim Winter, 2017. "Can Survey Participation Alter Household Saving Behaviour?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(606), pages 2332-2357, November.
    6. Deaton, Angus, 1985. "Panel data from time series of cross-sections," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 109-126.
    7. Frijters, Paul & Beatton, Tony, 2012. "The mystery of the U-shaped relationship between happiness and age," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 525-542.
    8. Falk, A. & Becker, A. & Dohmen, T.J. & Enke, B. & Huffman, D. & Sunde, U., 2015. "The nature and predictive power of preferences: Global evidence," Research Memorandum 039, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    9. Conchita D'Ambrosio & Joachim R. Frick, 2012. "Individual Wellbeing in a Dynamic Perspective," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 79(314), pages 284-302, April.
    10. Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & George Ward & Femke De Keulenaer & Bert Van Landeghem & Georgios Kavetsos & Michael I. Norton, 2018. "The Asymmetric Experience of Positive and Negative Economic Growth: Global Evidence Using Subjective Well-Being Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(2), pages 362-375, May.
    11. Gardner, Jonathan & Oswald, Andrew, 2004. "How is mortality affected by money, marriage, and stress?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 1181-1207, November.
    12. Ori Heffetz & Matthew Rabin, 2013. "Conclusions Regarding Cross-Group Differences in Happiness Depend on Difficulty of Reaching Respondents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 3001-3021, December.
    13. Raphael Studer & Rainer Winkelmann, 2014. "Reported Happiness, Fast and Slow," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(3), pages 1055-1067, July.
    14. Paul Fisher, 2019. "Does Repeated Measurement Improve Income Data Quality?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 81(5), pages 989-1011, October.
    15. Rafael Di Tella & Robert MacCulloch, 2006. "Some Uses of Happiness Data in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-46, Winter.
    16. Chadi, Adrian, 2013. "The role of interviewer encounters in panel responses on life satisfaction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 550-554.
    17. Detlef Landua, 1992. "An attempt to classify satisfaction changes: Methodological and content aspects of a longitudinal problem," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 221-241, May.
    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. 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.
    20. 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).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Tiziana Laureti, 2014. "Life satisfaction and environmental conditions in Italy: a pseudo-panel approach," Discussion Papers 2014/192, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    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, 2013. "The role of interviewer encounters in panel responses on life satisfaction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 550-554.
    5. Thomas F. Crossley & Jochem Bresser & Liam Delaney & Joachim Winter, 2017. "Can Survey Participation Alter Household Saving Behaviour?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(606), pages 2332-2357, November.
    6. Stephan, Gesine & Hetschko, Clemens & Schmidtke, Julia & Eid, Michael & Lawes, Mario, 2024. "Feeling Observed? A Field Experiment on the Effects of Intense Survey Participation on Job Seekers' Labour Market Outcomes," IZA Discussion Papers 17347, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Van Landeghem, Bert, 2012. "A test for the convexity of human well-being over the life cycle: Longitudinal evidence from a 20-year panel," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 571-582.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Chadi, Adrian, 2021. "Identification of attrition bias using different types of panel refreshments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    11. Biermann, Philipp & Bitzer, Jürgen & Gören, Erkan, 2022. "The relationship between age and subjective well-being: Estimating within and between effects simultaneously," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 21(C).
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Vendrik, Maarten C.M., 2013. "Adaptation, anticipation and social interaction in happiness: An integrated error-correction approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 131-149.
    15. Ana I. Moro Egido & Maria Navarro & Ángeles Sánchez-Domínguez, 2017. "Changes in Subjective Well-Being Over Time in Germnay," ThE Papers 17/05, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    16. Stefan Angel & Richard Heuberger & Nadja Lamei, 2018. "Differences Between Household Income from Surveys and Registers and How These Affect the Poverty Headcount: Evidence from the Austrian SILC," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(2), pages 575-603, July.
    17. Felix FitzRoy & Michael Nolan & Max Steinhardt & David Ulph, 2014. "Testing the tunnel effect: comparison, age and happiness in UK and German panels," IZA Journal of European Labor Studies, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 3(1), pages 1-30, December.
    18. 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.
    19. Maurizio Pugno & Francesco Sarracino, 2021. "Structural Changes in Economic Growth and Well-Being: The Case of Italy’s Parabola," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 801-838, December.
    20. Ning Li, 2014. "Multidimensionality of Longitudinal Data: Unlocking the Age-Happiness Puzzle," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2014n04, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Panel effects; Subjective data; Self-reflective questions; Identification;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • D60 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - General

    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:joepsy:v:72:y:2019:i:c:p:83-95. 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/joep .

    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.