IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/econom/v144y2008i2p430-446.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inference in panel data models under attrition caused by unobservables

Author

Listed:
  • Bhattacharya, Debopam

Abstract

This paper concerns identification and estimation of a finite-dimensional parameter in a panel data-model under nonignorable sample attrition. Attrition can depend on second period variables which are unobserved for the attritors but an independent refreshment sample from the marginal distribution of the second period values is available. This paper shows that under a quasi-separability assumption, the model implies a set of conditional moment restrictions where the moments contain the attrition function as an unknown parameter. This formulation leads to (i) a simple proof of identification under strictly weaker conditions than those in the existing literature and, more importantly, (ii) a sieve-based root-n consistent estimate of the finite-dimensional parameter of interest. These methods are applicable to both linear and nonlinear panel data models with endogenous attrition and analogous methods are applicable to situations of endogenously missing data in a single cross-section. The theory is illustrated with a simulation exercise, using Current Population Survey data where a panel structure is introduced by the rotation group feature of the sampling process.

Suggested Citation

  • Bhattacharya, Debopam, 2008. "Inference in panel data models under attrition caused by unobservables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 430-446, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:econom:v:144:y:2008:i:2:p:430-446
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304-4076(08)00038-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Verbeek, Marno & Nijman, Theo, 1992. "Testing for Selectivity Bias in Panel Data Models," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 33(3), pages 681-703, August.
    2. Ridder, Geert & Moffitt, Robert, 2007. "The Econometrics of Data Combination," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 6, chapter 75, Elsevier.
    3. 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.
    4. Pakes, Ariel & Pollard, David, 1989. "Simulation and the Asymptotics of Optimization Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 1027-1057, September.
    5. Nicoletti, Cheti, 2006. "Nonresponse in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 461-489, June.
    6. Chunrong Ai & Xiaohong Chen, 2003. "Efficient Estimation of Models with Conditional Moment Restrictions Containing Unknown Functions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1795-1843, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Nevo, Aviv, 2002. "Sample selection and information-theoretic alternatives to GMM," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 107(1-2), pages 149-157, March.
    9. Das, M., 2004. "Simple estimators for nonparametric panel data models with sample attrition," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 159-180, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2002. "Inverse probability weighted M-estimators for sample selection, attrition, and stratification," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 1(2), pages 117-139, August.
    12. Nevo, Aviv, 2003. "Using Weights to Adjust for Sample Selection When Auxiliary Information Is Available," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 21(1), pages 43-52, January.
    13. Nijman, T.E. & Verbeek, M.J.C.M., 1992. "Testing for selectivity in panel data models," Other publications TiSEM 7ec34a6c-1d84-4052-971c-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    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. Xavier d'Haultfoeuille & Stefan Hoderlein & Yuya Sasaki, 2013. "Nonlinear difference-in-differences in repeated cross sections with continuous treatments," CeMMAP working papers CWP40/13, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. Rene Segers & Philip Hans Franses, 2014. "Panel design effects on response rates and response quality," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 68(1), pages 1-24, February.
    3. 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.
    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. 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.
    6. Sasaki, Yuya & Xin, Yi, 2017. "Unequal spacing in dynamic panel data: Identification and estimation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 196(2), pages 320-330.
    7. Kim, Seik & Varanasi, Nalina, 2019. "Labor supply of married foreign-born women in credit-constrained households," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 411-421.
    8. Seik Kim, 2013. "Wage Mobility of Foreign-Born Workers in the United States," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 48(3), pages 628-658.
    9. Christophe Bell'ego & David Benatia & Vincent Dortet-Bernardet, 2023. "The Chained Difference-in-Differences," Papers 2301.01085, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    10. Emre Ekinci & Insan Tunah & Berk Yavuzoglu, 2017. "Rescaled Additivity Non-Ignorable (RAN) Model of Generalized Attrition," Working Papers 1702, Nazarbayev University, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2017.
    11. Olanrewaju Akande & Gabriel Madson & D. Sunshine Hillygus & Jerome P. Reiter, 2021. "Leveraging auxiliary information on marginal distributions in nonignorable models for item and unit nonresponse," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(2), pages 643-662, April.
    12. Insan Tunali & Emre Ekinci & Berk Yavuzoglu, 2012. "Rescaled Additively Non-ignorable (RAN) Model of Attrition and Substitution," Koç University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum Working Papers 1220, Koc University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum.
    13. Seik Kim, "undated". "Sample Attrition in the Presence of Population Attrition," Working Papers UWEC-2009-02, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    14. Yamana Kazufumi, 2020. "Monte Carlo Evidence on the Estimation Method for Industry Dynamics," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, January.
    15. Sasaki, Yuya, 2015. "Heterogeneity and selection in dynamic panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 236-249.
    16. Laurent Davezies & Xavier d'Haultfoeuille, 2013. "Endogenous Attrition in Panels," Working Papers 2013-17, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    17. Seik Kim & Nalina Varanasi, "undated". "Labor Supply of Married Women in Credit-Constrained Households: Theory and Evidence," Working Papers UWEC-2010-01, University of Washington, Department of Economics.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Yamana Kazufumi, 2020. "Monte Carlo Evidence on the Estimation Method for Industry Dynamics," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, January.
    5. Joachim Inkmann, 2010. "Estimating Firm Size Elasticities of Product and Process R&D," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 77(306), pages 384-402, April.
    6. Emre Ekinci & Insan Tunah & Berk Yavuzoglu, 2017. "Rescaled Additivity Non-Ignorable (RAN) Model of Generalized Attrition," Working Papers 1702, Nazarbayev University, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2017.
    7. Sasaki, Yuya, 2015. "Heterogeneity and selection in dynamic panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 236-249.
    8. Rene Segers & Philip Hans Franses, 2014. "Panel design effects on response rates and response quality," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 68(1), pages 1-24, February.
    9. 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.
    10. Prieto Suarez, Joaquin, 2021. "Poverty traps and affluence shields: modelling the persistence of income position in Chile," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110719, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Hübler, Olaf, 2005. "Panel Data Econometrics: Modelling and Estimation," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-319, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    12. Joaquín Prieto, 2021. "Poverty traps and affluence shields: Modelling the persistence of income position in Chile," Working Papers 576, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    13. Das, M., 2004. "Simple estimators for nonparametric panel data models with sample attrition," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 159-180, May.
    14. Inkmann, J., 2005. "Inverse Probability Weighted Generalised Empirical Likelihood Estimators : Firm Size and R&D Revisited," Other publications TiSEM c39cff1f-16c1-4446-a83f-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Nevo, Aviv, 2003. "Using Weights to Adjust for Sample Selection When Auxiliary Information Is Available," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 21(1), pages 43-52, January.
    16. 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.
    17. Bryan S. Graham & Cristine Campos De Xavier Pinto & Daniel Egel, 2012. "Inverse Probability Tilting for Moment Condition Models with Missing Data," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(3), pages 1053-1079.
    18. Emre Ekinci, 2009. "Dealing with Attrition When Refreshment Samples are Available: An Application to the Turkish Household Labor Force Survey," 2009 Meeting Papers 353, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    19. Lee, Yong-Woo, 2016. "State Dependence, Unobserved Heterogeneity, And Health Dynamics In Korea," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 57(2), pages 195-221, December.
    20. Nicoletti, Cheti, 2006. "Nonresponse in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 461-489, June.

    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:eee:econom:v:144:y:2008:i:2:p:430-446. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jeconom .

    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.