IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v41y2012i4p535-569.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking Survey and Administrative Records

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph W. Sakshaug
  • Mick P. Couper
  • Mary Beth Ofstedal
  • David R. Weir

Abstract

Survey records are increasingly being linked to administrative databases to enhance the survey data and increase research opportunities for data users. A necessary prerequisite to linking survey and administrative records is obtaining informed consent from respondents. Obtaining consent from all respondents is a difficult challenge and one that faces significant resistance. Consequently, data linkage consent rates vary widely from study to study. Several studies have found significant differences between consenters and nonconsenters on sociodemographic variables, but no study has investigated the underlying mechanisms of consent from a theory-driven perspective. In this study, we describe and test several hypotheses related to respondents’ willingness to consent to an earnings and benefit data linkage request based on mechanisms related to financial uncertainty, privacy concerns, resistance toward the survey interview, level of attentiveness during the interview, the respondents’ preexisting relationship with the administrative data agency, and matching respondents and interviewers on observable characteristics. The results point to several implications for survey practice and suggestions for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph W. Sakshaug & Mick P. Couper & Mary Beth Ofstedal & David R. Weir, 2012. "Linking Survey and Administrative Records," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(4), pages 535-569, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:41:y:2012:i:4:p:535-569
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124112460381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124112460381
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124112460381?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen P. Jenkins & Lorenzo Cappellari & Peter Lynn & Annette Jäckle & Emanuela Sala, 2006. "Patterns of consent: evidence from a general household survey," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(4), pages 701-722, October.
    2. C. O'Muircheartaigh & P. Campanelli, 1999. "A multilevel exploration of the role of interviewers in survey non‐response," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 162(3), pages 437-446.
    3. Emanuela Sala & Jonathan Burton & Gundi Knies, 2012. "Correlates of Obtaining Informed Consent to Data Linkage," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(3), pages 414-439, August.
    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. Steffen Künn, 2015. "The challenges of linking survey and administrative data," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 214-214, December.
    2. Al Baghal, Tarek & Knies, Gundi & Burton, Jonathan, 2014. "Linking administrative records to surveys: differences in the correlates to consent decisions," Understanding Society Working Paper Series 2014-09, Understanding Society at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    3. Warnke, Arne Jonas, 2017. "An investigation of record linkage refusal and its implications for empirical research," ZEW Discussion Papers 17-031, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Das Marcel & Couper Mick P., 2014. "Optimizing Opt-Out Consent for Record Linkage," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 30(3), pages 479-497, September.
    5. Bucks, Brian & Pence, Karen, 2015. "Wealth, pensions, debt, and savings: Considerations for a panel survey," Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, IOS Press, issue 1-4, pages 151-175.

    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. Korbmacher, Julie M. & Schröder, Mathis, 2013. "Consent when Linking Survey Data with Administrative Records: The Role of the Interviewer," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7(2), pages 115-131.
    2. Fertig, Michael & Görlitz, Katja, 2013. "Missing wages: How to test for biased estimates in wage functions?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 269-271.
    3. Sala, Emanuela & Knies, Gundi & Burton, Jonathan, 2013. "Propensity to consent to data linkage: experimental evidence from the Innovation Panel on the role of three survey design features," Understanding Society Working Paper Series 2013-05, Understanding Society at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    4. Gessendorfer Jonathan & Beste Jonas & Drechsler Jörg & Sakshaug Joseph W., 2018. "Statistical Matching as a Supplement to Record Linkage: A Valuable Method to Tackle Nonconsent Bias?," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 34(4), pages 909-933, December.
    5. Warnke, Arne Jonas, 2017. "An investigation of record linkage refusal and its implications for empirical research," ZEW Discussion Papers 17-031, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Al Baghal, Tarek & Knies, Gundi & Burton, Jonathan, 2014. "Linking administrative records to surveys: differences in the correlates to consent decisions," Understanding Society Working Paper Series 2014-09, Understanding Society at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    7. Emanuela Sala & Jonathan Burton & Gundi Knies, 2012. "Correlates of Obtaining Informed Consent to Data Linkage," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(3), pages 414-439, August.
    8. Sakshaug Joseph W., 2022. "Reducing Nonresponse and Data Linkage Consent Bias in Large-Scale Panel Surveys," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 25(1-2), pages 41-55, December.
    9. Zeina Mneimneh, 2022. "Evaluation of consent to link Twitter data to survey data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(S2), pages 364-386, December.
    10. Babette Bühler & Katja Möhring & Andreas P. Weiland, 2022. "Assessing dissimilarity of employment history information from survey and administrative data using sequence analysis techniques," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 4747-4774, December.
    11. Cherkashin, Ivan & Demidova, Svetlana & Imai, Susumu & Krishna, Kala, 2009. "The inside scoop: Acceptance and rejection at the journal of international economics," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 120-132, February.
    12. Coisnon, Thomas & Rousselière, Damien & Rousselière, Samira, 2018. "Information on biodiversity and environmental behaviors: a European study of individual and institutional drivers to adopt sustainable gardening practices," Working Papers 272611, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    13. Lorenzo Cappellari & Stephen P. Jenkins, 2006. "Calculation of multivariate normal probabilities by simulation, with applications to maximum simulated likelihood estimation," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 6(2), pages 156-189, June.
    14. Paulus, Alari, 2015. "Tax evasion and measurement error: An econometric analysis of survey data linked with tax records," ISER Working Paper Series 2015-10, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    15. Henning Silber & Johannes Breuer & Christoph Beuthner & Tobias Gummer & Florian Keusch & Pascal Siegers & Sebastian Stier & Bernd Weiß, 2022. "Linking surveys and digital trace data: Insights from two studies on determinants of data sharing behaviour," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(S2), pages 387-407, December.
    16. Wagner James & Olson Kristen, 2018. "An Analysis of Interviewer Travel and Field Outcomes in Two Field Surveys," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 34(1), pages 211-237, March.
    17. Peter Lynn & Annette Jäckle & Stephen P. Jenkins & Emanuela Sala, 2012. "The impact of questioning method on measurement error in panel survey measures of benefit receipt: evidence from a validation study," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 175(1), pages 289-308, January.
    18. Lynn, Peter & Jäckle, Annette & Sala, Emanuela & P. Jenkins, Stephen, 2004. "Linking household survey and administrative record data: what should the matching variables be?," ISER Working Paper Series 2004-23, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    19. van den Berg, Gerard J & Lindeboom, Maarten & Dolton, Peter J, 2004. "Survey non-response and unemployment duration," Working Paper Series 2004:12, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    20. Tadeusz Bednarski, 2014. "On robust causality nonresponse testing in duration studies under the Cox model," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 221-231, February.

    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:sae:somere:v:41:y:2012:i:4:p:535-569. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.