IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cen/wpaper/22-46.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Examination of the Informational Value of Self-Reported Innovation Questions

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng Tian
  • Timothy R. Wojan
  • Stephan J. Goetz

Abstract

Self-reported innovation measures provide an alternative means for examining the economic performance of firms or regions. While European researchers have been exploiting the data from the Community Innovation Survey for over two decades, uptake of US innovation data has been much slower. This paper uses a restricted innovation survey designed to differentiate incremental innovators from more far-ranging innovators and compares it to responses in the Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs (ASE) and the Business R&D and Innovation Survey (BRDIS) to examine the informational value of these positive innovation measures. The analysis begins by examining the association between the incremental innovation measure in the Rural Establishment Innovation Survey (REIS) and a measure of the inter-industry buying and selling complexity. A parallel analysis using BRDIS and ASE reveals such an association may vary among surveys, providing additional insight on the informational value of various innovation profiles available in self-reported innovation surveys.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng Tian & Timothy R. Wojan & Stephan J. Goetz, 2022. "An Examination of the Informational Value of Self-Reported Innovation Questions," Working Papers 22-46, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    • Handle: RePEc:cen:wpaper:22-46
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www2.census.gov/ces/wp/2022/CES-WP-22-46.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2022
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pryor,Frederic L., 1996. "Economic Evolution and Structure," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521550970, September.
    2. Timothy R Wojan & Bonnie Nichols, 2018. "Design, innovation, and rural creative places: Are the arts the cherry on top, or the secret sauce?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-23, February.
    3. Pryor,Frederic L., 1996. "Economic Evolution and Structure," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521559249, September.
    4. Wojan, Tim & Parker, Timothy, 2017. "Innovation in the Rural Nonfarm Economy: Its Effect on Job and Earnings Growth, 2010-2014," Economic Research Report 264596, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. Wojan, Timothy R. & Crown, Daniel & Rupasingha, Anil, 2018. "Varieties of innovation and business survival: Does pursuit of incremental or far-ranging innovation make manufacturing establishments more resilient?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1801-1810.
    6. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    7. Timothy R Wojan & Timothy F Slaper, 2020. "Are the problem spaces of economic actors increasingly virtual? What geo-located web activity might tell us about economic dynamism," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-22, September.
    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. Crown, Daniel & Faggian, Alessandra & Corcoran, Jonathan, 2020. "Foreign-Born graduates and innovation: Evidence from an Australian skilled visa program✰,✰✰,★,★★," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(9).
    2. Geoffrey M. Hodgson & Thorbjørn Knudsen, 2006. "Balancing Inertia, Innovation, and Imitation in Complex Environments," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 287-295, June.
    3. Frederic L. Pryor, 1999. "The Impact of Foreign Trade on the Employment of Unskilled U.S. Workers: Some New Evidence," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(3), pages 472-492, January.
    4. Goetz, Stephan J. & Han, Yicheol, 2020. "Latent innovation in local economies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    5. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2019. "The great crash of 2008 and the reform of economics," Chapters, in: Jonathan Michie (ed.), The Handbook of Globalisation, Third Edition, chapter 28, pages 439-456, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2011. "Sickonomics: Diagnoses and Remedies," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(3), pages 357-376, September.
    7. Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & David B Audretsch & Timothy F Slaper, 2019. "Sources of innovation and innovation type: firm-level evidence from the United States," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(6), pages 1365-1379.
    8. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2003. "Capitalism, Complexity, and Inequality," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 471-478, June.
    9. J Foster, 2000. "Is There A Role For Transaction Cost Economics If We View Firms As Complex Adaptive Systems?," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(4), pages 369-385, October.
    10. Jonathan Michie (ed.), 2011. "The Handbook of Globalisation, Second Edition," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14082.
    11. Margarida Bandeira Morais & J. Swart & J.A. Jordaan, 2018. "Economic Complexity and Inequality: Does Productive Structure Affect Regional Wage Differentials in Brazil?," Working Papers 18-11, Utrecht School of Economics.
    12. Bruneel, Johan & Clarysse, Bart & Bobelyn, Annelies & Wright, Mike, 2020. "Liquidity events and VC-backed academic spin-offs: The role of search alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(10).
    13. Forman, Chris & van Zeebroeck, Nicolas, 2019. "Digital technology adoption and knowledge flows within firms: Can the Internet overcome geographic and technological distance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    14. Mohammadi, Ali & Broström, Anders & Franzoni, Chiara, 2015. "Work Force Composition and Innovation: How Diversity in Employees’ Ethnical and Disciplinary Backgrounds Facilitates Knowledge Re-combination," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 413, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    15. Barry L. Bayus, 2013. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 226-244, June.
    16. Mario Schaarschmidt & Dirk Homscheid & Thomas Kilian, 2019. "Application Developer Engagement In Open Software Platforms: An Empirical Study Of Apple Ios And Google Android Developers," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(04), pages 1-33, May.
    17. Herm, Steffen & Callsen-Bracker, Hans-Markus & Kreis, Henning, 2014. "When the crowd evaluates soccer players’ market values: Accuracy and evaluation attributes of an online community," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 484-492.
    18. Rosenzweig, Stav & Grinstein, Amir & Ofek, Elie, 2016. "Social network utilization and the impact of academic research in marketing," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 818-839.
    19. Ricardo S. Santos & Jose Soares & Pedro Carmona Marques & Helena V. G. Navas & José Moleiro Martins, 2021. "Integrating Business, Social, and Environmental Goals in Open Innovation through Partner Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-25, November.
    20. Xie, Zongjie & Hall, Jeremy & McCarthy, Ian P. & Skitmore, Martin & Shen, Liyin, 2016. "Standardization efforts: The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search processes and innovation outcomes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 69-78.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Self-reported innovation; substantive and incremental innovation; latent innovation measure; logistic regression;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O00 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - General - - - General
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cen:wpaper:22-46. 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: Dawn Anderson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesgvus.html .

    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.