How reliable are income data collected with a single question?
AbstractIncome is an important correlate for numerous phenomena in the social sciences. But many surveys collect data with just a single question covering all forms of income. This raises questions over the reliability of the data that are collected. Issues of reliability are heightened when individuals are asked about the household total rather than own income alone. We argue that the large literature on measuring incomes has not devoted enough attention to 'single-question' surveys. We investigate the reliability of single-question data by using the UK Office for National Statistics's Omnibus survey and the British Social Attitudes survey as examples. We compare the distributions of income in these surveys-individual income in the Omnibus and household income in the British Social Attitudes survey-with those in two larger UK surveys that measure income in much greater detail. Distributions compare less well for household income than for individual income. Disaggregation by gender proves fruitful in much of the analysis. We also establish levels of item non-response to the income question in single-question surveys from a wide range of countries. Copyright (c) 2010 Royal Statistical Society.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Royal Statistical Society in its journal Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society).
Volume (Year): 173 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 12 Errol Street, London EC1Y 8LX, United Kingdom
Web page: http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/rssa
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- John Micklewright & Sylke V. Schnepf, 2009. "How Reliable are Income Data Collected with a Single Question?," DoQSS Working Papers, Department of Quantitative Social Science - Institute of Education, University of London 09-03, Department of Quantitative Social Science - Institute of Education, University of London.
- Micklewright, John & Schnepf, Sylke V., 2007. "How Reliable Are Income Data Collected with a Single Question?," IZA Discussion Papers 3177, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
- C8 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- repec:ese:iserwp:2009-14 is not listed on IDEAS
- Kirstine Hansen & Dylan Kneale, 2013. "Does How You Measure Income Make a Difference to Measuring Poverty? Evidence from the UK," Social Indicators Research, Springer, Springer, vol. 110(3), pages 1119-1140, February.
- Thomas F. Crossley & Joachim K. Winter, 2013.
"Asking Households About Expenditures: What Have We Learned?,"
NBER Working Papers
19543, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Thomas F. Crossley & Joachim K. Winter, 2014. "Asking Households about Expenditures: What Have We Learned?," NBER Chapters, in: Improving the Measurement of Consumer Expenditures National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jake Anders, 2012. "Using the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England for research into Higher Education access," DoQSS Working Papers, Department of Quantitative Social Science - Institute of Education, University of London 12-13, Department of Quantitative Social Science - Institute of Education, University of London.
- Marco Francesconi & Holly Sutherland & Francesca Zantomio, 2011.
"A comparison of earnings measures from longitudinal and cross‐sectional surveys: evidence from the UK,"
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society,
Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(2), pages 297-326, 04.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.