IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/offsta/v35y2019i1p67-92n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Administrative Data to Evaluate Sampling Bias in a Business Panel Survey

Author

Listed:
  • D’Aurizio Leandro

    (Italian Authority for the Supervision of the Insurance Sector (IVASS), Research and Data Management Directorate, via del Quirinale 21, 00187Rome, Italy.)

  • Papadia Giuseppina

    (Bank of Italy, Economics and Statistics Department, via Nazionale 91, 00181Rome, Italy.)

Abstract

We examine two sources of bias for the Bank of Italy’s panel business survey of Industrial and Services Firms:1) the bias caused by panel attrition; and2) the bias created by delays in the distributional data on the reference population, needed for computing the survey weights.As for the first source of bias, the estimates strongly dependent on big firms’ values are less affected by panel attrition than those representing firms’ average behavior, independent of their sizes. Positive economic results make it easier to enroll new firms in the survey, in order to replace firms dropping out because of bad economic performances. However, the economic results of new entrances become more aligned to those of the population, once they enter the sample.A very different result emerges for the second source of bias, since, when the population size is highly variable, the information delays produce a bias for the estimates influenced by the contribution of great firms, but the effect is negligible for the estimates not dependent on firm size.

Suggested Citation

  • D’Aurizio Leandro & Papadia Giuseppina, 2019. "Using Administrative Data to Evaluate Sampling Bias in a Business Panel Survey," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 35(1), pages 67-92, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:offsta:v:35:y:2019:i:1:p:67-92:n:4
    DOI: 10.2478/jos-2019-0004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2019-0004
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/jos-2019-0004?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. Ivan Faiella, 2010. "The use of survey weights in regression analysis," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 739, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    2. Knapp, Morris & Gart, Alan & Chaudhry, Mukesh, 2006. "The impact of mean reversion of bank profitability on post-merger performance in the banking industry," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(12), pages 3503-3517, December.
    3. Gary Solon & Steven J. Haider & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2015. "What Are We Weighting For?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(2), pages 301-316.
    4. Ugo Trivellato, 1999. "Issues in the Design and Analysis of Panel Studies: A Cursory Review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 339-351, 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. Francesco D'Amuri & Salvatore Lattanzio & Benjamin S. Smith, 2023. "The anatomy of labor cost adjustment to demand shocks: Germany and Italy during the Great Recession," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1411, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.

    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. Ampudia, Miguel & Ehrmann, Michael, 2017. "Macroeconomic experiences and risk taking of euro area households," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 146-156.
    2. Ehrmann, Michael & Ziegelmeyer, Michael, 2014. "Household Risk Management and Actual Mortgage Choice in the Euro Area," MEA discussion paper series 201406, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    3. repec:mea:meawpa:14283 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Leandro D�Aurizio & Giuseppina Papadia, 2016. "Using external sources to understand sample survey bias: the case of the Invind survey," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 329, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    5. Jessamyn Schaller & Mariana Zerpa, 2019. "Short-Run Effects of Parental Job Loss on Child Health," American Journal of Health Economics, MIT Press, vol. 5(1), pages 8-41, Winter.
    6. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    7. Kim, Dongin & Steinbach, Sandro, 2021. "Spillover effects of foreign direct investment in the United States: County-level evidence from the food industry," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313983, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Matz Dahlberg & Karin Edmark & Heléne Berg, 2017. "Revisiting the Relationship between Ethnic Diversity and Preferences for Redistribution: Reply," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 119(2), pages 288-294, April.
    9. Austin L. Wright, 2016. "Economic Shocks and Rebel," HiCN Working Papers 232, Households in Conflict Network.
    10. Auke Rijpma & Jeanne Cilliers & Johan Fourie, 2020. "Record linkage in the Cape of Good Hope Panel," Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(2), pages 112-129, April.
    11. Wang, Huixia & Wang, Chenggang & Halliday, Timothy J., 2018. "Health and health inequality during the great recession: Evidence from the PSID," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 17-30.
    12. Clémence Kieny & Gabriela Flores & Jürgen Maurer, 2021. "Assessing and decomposing gender differences in evaluative and emotional well-being among older adults in the developing world," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 189-221, March.
    13. James Bishop & Iris Chan, 2019. "Is Declining Union Membership Contributing to Low Wages Growth?," RBA Annual Conference Papers acp2019-06, Reserve Bank of Australia.
    14. Marianne Tenand, 2018. "Being dependent rather than handicapped in France: Does the institutional barrier at 60 affect care arrangements?," Working Papers halshs-01889452, HAL.
    15. Durlauf, Steven N. & Navarro, Salvador & Rivers, David A., 2016. "Model uncertainty and the effect of shall-issue right-to-carry laws on crime," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 32-67.
    16. Fendel Tanja, 2016. "Migration and Regional Wage Disparities in Germany," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 236(1), pages 3-35, February.
    17. Julen Esteban‐Pretel & Junichi Fujimoto, 2022. "How do marital formation and dissolution differ across employment statuses? Analysis of Japanese non‐regular employees," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(5), pages 425-461, December.
    18. Sharpe, Jamie & Bollinger, Christopher R., 2020. "Who competes with whom? Using occupation characteristics to estimate the impact of immigration on native wages," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    19. Colleen Carey, 2017. "Technological Change and Risk Adjustment: Benefit Design Incentives in Medicare Part D," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 38-73, February.
    20. Ilaria Natali & Mathias Dewatripont & Victor Ginsburgh & Michel Goldman & Patrick Legros, 2023. "Prescription opioids and economic hardship in France," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(9), pages 1473-1504, December.
    21. Tymon Słoczyński, 2022. "Interpreting OLS Estimands When Treatment Effects Are Heterogeneous: Smaller Groups Get Larger Weights," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(3), pages 501-509, May.

    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:vrs:offsta:v:35:y:2019:i:1:p:67-92:n:4. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.