IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/offsta/v36y2020i3p507-527n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolution of the Initially Recruited SHARE Panel Sample Over the First Six Waves

Author

Listed:
  • Friedel Sabine

    (University of Mannheim, SFB 884 “Political Economy of Reforms”, B6, 30-32, 68131Mannheim, Germany.)

  • Birkenbach Tim

    (Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA), Amalienstrasse 33, 80799Munich, Germany.)

Abstract

Attrition is a frequently observed phenomenon in panel studies. The loss of panel members over time can hamper the analysis of panel survey data. Based on data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), this study investigates changes in the composition of the initially recruited first-wave sample in a multi-national face-to-face panel survey of an older population over waves. By inspecting retention rates and R-indicators, we found that, despite declining retention rates, the composition of the initially recruited panel sample in Wave 1 remained stable after the second wave. Thus, after the second wave there is no further large decline in representativeness with regard to the first wave sample. Changes in the composition of the sample after the second wave over time were due mainly to mortality-related attrition. Non-mortality-related attrition had a slight effect on the changes in sample composition with regard to birth in survey country, area of residence, education, and social activities. Our study encourages researchers to investigate further the impact of mortality- and non-mortality-related attrition in multi-national surveys of older populations.

Suggested Citation

  • Friedel Sabine & Birkenbach Tim, 2020. "Evolution of the Initially Recruited SHARE Panel Sample Over the First Six Waves," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 36(3), pages 507-527, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:offsta:v:36:y:2020:i:3:p:507-527:n:4
    DOI: 10.2478/jos-2020-0027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2020-0027
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/jos-2020-0027?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. John Fitzgerald & Peter Gottschalk & Robert Moffitt, 1998. "An Analysis of Sample Attrition in Panel Data: The Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 251-299.
    2. Johanna Bristle & Martina Celidoni & Chiara Dal Bianco & Guglielmo Weber, 2019. "The contributions of paradata and features of respondents, interviewers and survey agencies to panel co‐operation in the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 182(1), pages 3-35, January.
    3. Schouten, Barry & Shlomo, Natalie & Skinner, Chris J., 2011. "Indicators for monitoring and improving representativeness of response," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 39121, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Annemieke Luiten & Barry Schouten, 2013. "Tailored fieldwork design to increase representative household survey response: an experiment in the Survey of Consumer Satisfaction," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(1), pages 169-189, January.
    5. Annamaria Bianchi & Silvia Biffignandi, 2019. "Social Indicators to Explain Response in Longitudinal Studies," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 931-957, February.
    6. Mikko Myrskylä & Joshua R. Goldstein & Yen-hsin Alice Cheng, 2013. "New Cohort Fertility Forecasts for the Developed World: Rises, Falls, and Reversals," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 39(1), pages 31-56, March.
    7. Barry Schouten & Jelke Bethlehem & Koen Beullens & Øyvin Kleven & Geert Loosveldt & Annemieke Luiten & Katja Rutar & Natalie Shlomo & Chris Skinner, 2012. "Evaluating, Comparing, Monitoring, and Improving Representativeness of Survey Response Through R-Indicators and Partial R-Indicators," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 80(3), pages 382-399, December.
    8. Annamaria Bianchi & Silvia Biffignandi, 2017. "Representativeness in panel surveys," Mathematical Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 126-143, April.
    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. Roberts Caroline & Vandenplas Caroline & Herzing Jessica M.E., 2020. "A Validation of R-Indicators as a Measure of the Risk of Bias using Data from a Nonresponse Follow-Up Survey," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 36(3), pages 675-701, September.
    2. Li-Chun Zhang & Ib Thomsen & Øyvin Kleven, 2013. "On the Use of Auxiliary and Paradata for Dealing With Non-sampling Errors in Household Surveys," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 81(2), pages 270-288, August.
    3. Aneta Chmielewska & Małgorzata Renigier-Biłozor & Artur Janowski, 2022. "Representative Residential Property Model—Soft Computing Solution," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-24, November.
    4. Bettina Müller & Laura Castiglioni, 2020. "Do Temporary Dropouts Improve the Composition of Panel Data? An Analysis of “Gap Interviews†in the German Family Panel pairfam," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 49(1), pages 193-215, February.
    5. Martina Celidoni & Chiara Dal Bianco & Vincenzo Rebba & Guglielmo Weber, 2020. "Retirement and Healthy Eating," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 199-219, March.
    6. Vandenplas Caroline & Loosveldt Geert & Beullens Koen, 2017. "Fieldwork Monitoring for the European Social Survey: An illustration with Belgium and the Czech Republic in Round 7," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 659-686, September.
    7. Barry Schouten & Fannie Cobben & Peter Lundquist & James Wagner, 2016. "Does more balanced survey response imply less non-response bias?," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 179(3), pages 727-748, June.
    8. Carina Cornesse & Ulrich Krieger & Marie‐Lou Sohnius & Marina Fikel & Sabine Friedel & Tobias Rettig & Alexander Wenz & Sebastian Juhl & Roni Lehrer & Katja Möhring & Elias Naumann & Maximiliane Reife, 2022. "From German Internet Panel to Mannheim Corona Study: Adaptable probability‐based online panel infrastructures during the pandemic," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(3), pages 773-797, July.
    9. Kaminska Olena & Lynn Peter, 2017. "The Implications of Alternative Allocation Criteria in Adaptive Design for Panel Surveys," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 781-799, September.
    10. Paiva Thais & Reiter Jerome P., 2017. "Stop or Continue Data Collection: A Nonignorable Missing Data Approach for Continuous Variables," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 579-599, September.
    11. Barry Schouten & Natalie Shlomo, 2017. "Selecting Adaptive Survey Design Strata with Partial R-indicators," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 85(1), pages 143-163, April.
    12. Silvia Biffignandi & Alessandro Zeli, 2022. "Building panels from archives: the longitudinal representativity," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 80(1), pages 121-138, April.
    13. Thais Paiva & Jerry Reiter, 2014. "Using Imputation Techniques To Evaluate Stopping Rules In Adaptive Survey Design," Working Papers 14-40, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    14. Jamie C. Moore & Peter W. F. Smith & Gabriele B. Durrant, 2018. "Correlates of record linkage and estimating risks of non‐linkage biases in business data sets," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 181(4), pages 1211-1230, October.
    15. de Brauw, Alan & Gilligan, Daniel O. & Hoddinott, John & Roy, Shalini, 2014. "The Impact of Bolsa Família on Women’s Decision-Making Power," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 487-504.
    16. Teresa Molina Millán & Karen Macours, 2017. "Attrition in randomized control trials: Using tracking information to correct bias," FEUNL Working Paper Series novaf:wp1702, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Economia.
    17. Chen, Yuanyuan & Feng, Shuaizhang & Han, Yujie, 2020. "The effect of primary school type on the high school opportunities of migrant children in China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 325-338.
    18. Barbara S. Okun & Liat Raz‐Yurovich, 2019. "Housework, Gender Role Attitudes, and Couples' Fertility Intentions: Reconsidering Men's Roles in Gender Theories of Family Change," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 45(1), pages 169-196, March.
    19. Patrick Richard & Regine Walker & Pierre Alexandre, 2018. "The burden of out of pocket costs and medical debt faced by households with chronic health conditions in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-13, June.
    20. Benson, Rebecca & von Hippel, Paul T. & Lynch, Jamie L., 2018. "Does more education cause lower BMI, or do lower-BMI individuals become more educated? Evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 370-377.

    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:36:y:2020:i:3:p:507-527: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.