IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ese/iserwp/2004-06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Explaining interviewee contact and co-operation in the British and German Household Panels

Author

Listed:
  • Nicoletti, Cheti
  • Buck, Nick

Abstract

This paper investigates the factors affecting the contact and the co-operation of the interviewees in the British Household Panel Survey, in the German Socio Economic Panel Survey and in the European Community Household Panel for the UK and for Germany. The coexistence of two independent panel surveys in the UK and in Germany gives the opportunity to investigate if differentials in the contact and co-operation rates are due to differences in the data collection, personal and household characteristics and/or differences in their impact between countries or between surveys in a same country. If the differentials are explained mainly by differences in the characteristics then it is possible to reduce differentials just by harmonising the data collection. If instead differentials are attributable to heterogeneity in the response behaviour across countries or surveys in a same country, then the harmonisation of the data collection process has a more ambiguous effect. We model the response at individual level as the occurrence of two sequential events: the contact and the co-operation. We explain the contact and the co-operation probabilities in wave t using a set of individual and household characteristics observed in wave t-1, a set of variables characterising the collection process in wave t and t-1, and an interviewer random effect. Moreover, we investigate differences between surveys in the refusal and in the failed contact probabilities by trying to disentangle the part due to differences in the distribution of the explanatory variables and the part due to differences in the model coefficients.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicoletti, Cheti & Buck, Nick, 2004. "Explaining interviewee contact and co-operation in the British and German Household Panels," ISER Working Paper Series 2004-06, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:ese:iserwp:2004-06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/files/working-papers/iser/2004-06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wiji Arulampalam, 1999. "A Note on Estimated Coefficients in Random Effects Probit Models," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(4), pages 597-602, November.
    2. 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.
    3. Pamela Campanelli & Colm O'Muircheartaigh, 2002. "The Importance of Experimental Control in Testing the Impact of Interviewer Continuity on Panel Survey Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 129-144, May.
    4. Ridder, Geert, 1992. "An empirical evaluation of some models for non-random attrition in panel data," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 337-355, December.
    5. Robinson, Peter M, 1982. "On the Asymptotic Properties of Estimators of Models Containing Limited Dependent Variables," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 27-41, January.
    6. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1979. "Attrition Bias in Experimental and Panel Data: The Gary Income Maintenance Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 455-473, March.
    7. G. S. Maddala, 1987. "Limited Dependent Variable Models Using Panel Data," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 22(3), pages 307-338.
    8. Franco Peracchi, 2002. "The European Community Household Panel: A review," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 63-90.
    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. Wuyts Celine & Loosveldt Geert, 2020. "Measurement of Interviewer Workload within the Survey and an Exploration of Workload Effects on Interviewers’ Field Efforts and Performance," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 36(3), pages 561-588, September.
    2. Corinna Kleinert & Bernhard Christoph & Michael Ruland, 2021. "Experimental Evidence on Immediate and Long-term Consequences of Test-induced Respondent Burden for Panel Attrition," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 50(4), pages 1552-1583, November.
    3. Sadig, Husam, 2014. "Weighting for non-monotonic response pattern in longitudinal surveys," ISER Working Paper Series 2014-34, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    4. Isabella Buber-Ennser, 2014. "Attrition in the Austrian Generations and Gender Survey," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 31(16), pages 459-496.
    5. G. Blom, Annelies, 2009. "Explaining cross-country differences in contact rates," ISER Working Paper Series 2009-08, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    6. Kleinert, Corinna & Ruland, Michael & Trahms, Annette, 2013. "Bias in einem komplexen Surveydesign : Ausfallprozesse und Selektivität in der IAB-Befragung ALWA," FDZ Methodenreport 201302_de, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    7. Lynn, Peter & Jäckle, Annette & G. Blom, Annelies, 2008. "Understanding cross-national differences in unit non-response: the role of contact data," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-01, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    8. Sadig, Husam, 2014. "Unknown eligibility whilst weighting for non-response: the puzzle of who has died and who is still alive?," ISER Working Paper Series 2014-35, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    9. repec:iab:iabfme:201302(de is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Nicole Watson & Mark Wooden, 2011. "Re-engaging with Survey Non-respondents: The BHPS, SOEP and HILDA Survey Experience," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2011n02, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    11. Pforr, Klaus & Blohm, Michael & Blom, Annelies G. & Erdel, Barbara & Felderer, Barbara & Fräßdorf, Mathis & Hajek, Kristin & Helmschrott, Susanne & Kleinert, Corinna & Koch, Achim & Krieger, Ulrich & , 2015. "Are Incentive Effects on Response Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Large-scale, Face-to-face Surveys Generalizable to Germany? Evidence from Ten Experiments," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 79(3), pages 740-768.
    12. 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.
    13. Sadig, Husam, 2014. "Non-response subgroup-tailored weighting: the choice of variables and the set of respondents used to estimate the weighting model," ISER Working Paper Series 2014-36, Institute for Social and Economic Research.

    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. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder & Donald B. Rubin, 2001. "Combining Panel Data Sets with Attrition and Refreshment Samples," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1645-1659, November.
    2. Terence C. Cheng & Pravin K. Trivedi, 2015. "Attrition Bias in Panel Data: A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing? A Case Study Based on the Mabel Survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1101-1117, September.
    3. Shin, Jaeun & Moon, Sangho, 2006. "Fertility, relative wages, and labor market decisions: A case of female teachers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 591-604, December.
    4. Harding, Matthew & Lamarche, Carlos, 2019. "A panel quantile approach to attrition bias in Big Data: Evidence from a randomized experiment," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 61-82.
    5. Diaz-Serrano, Luis, 2005. "Income volatility and residential mortgage delinquency across the EU," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 153-177, September.
    6. Juergen Jung, 2022. "Estimating transition probabilities between health states using US longitudinal survey data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 901-943, August.
    7. Cheti Nicoletti & Franco Peracchi & Vincenzo Atella, 2005. "Survey Response and Survey Characteristics: Micro-level Evidence from the European Commission Household Panel," CEIS Research Paper 64, Tor Vergata University, CEIS.
    8. Christopher J. Gerry & Georgios Papadopoulos, 2015. "Sample attrition in the RLMS, 2001–10," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 23(2), pages 425-468, April.
    9. Richard Dorsett, 2004. "Using matched substitutes to adjust for nonignorable nonresponse: an empirical investigation using labour market data," PSI Research Discussion Series 16, Policy Studies Institute, UK.
    10. 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.
    11. Andrew M. Jones & Xander Koolman & Nigel Rice, 2006. "Health‐related non‐response in the British Household Panel Survey and European Community Household Panel: using inverse‐probability‐weighted estimators in non‐linear models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 543-569, July.
    12. Nicoletti, Cheti & Peracchi, Franco, 2004. "Survey response and survey characteristics: Micro-level evidence from the ECHP," Economics & Statistics Discussion Papers esdp04015, University of Molise, Department of Economics.
    13. Heng Chen & Marie-Hélène Felt & Kim P. Huynh, 2017. "Retail payment innovations and cash usage: accounting for attrition by using refreshment samples," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 503-530, February.
    14. Laisney, François & Pohlmeier, Winfried & Staat, Matthias, 1991. "Estimation of labour supply functions using panel data: a survey," ZEW Discussion Papers 91-05, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. Martin Huber, 2012. "Identification of Average Treatment Effects in Social Experiments Under Alternative Forms of Attrition," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 37(3), pages 443-474, June.
    16. Kapteyn, Arie & Michaud, Pierre-Carl & Smith, James P. & van Soest, Arthur, 2006. "Effects of Attrition and Non-Response in the Health and Retirement Study," IZA Discussion Papers 2246, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. 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.
    18. Martin Huber, 2010. "Identification of average treatment effects in social experiments under different forms of attrition," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2010 2010-22, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    19. Michael Fertig & Stefanie Schurer, 2007. "Earnings Assimilation of Immigrants in Germany: The Importance of Heterogeneity and Attrition Bias," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 30, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    20. Georges Dionne & Pierre-Carl Michaud & Maki Dahchour, 2004. "Separating Moral Hazard from Adverse Selection in Automobile Insurance: Longitudinal Evidence from France," Cahiers de recherche 0420, CIRPEE.

    More about this item

    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:ese:iserwp:2004-06. 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: Jonathan Nears (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rcessuk.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.