Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Analysis of the validity of the vignette approach to correct for heterogeneity in reporting health system responsiveness

Contents:

Author Info

  • Nigel Rice
  • Silvana Robone

    ()

  • Peter Smith

Abstract

Despite the growing popularity of the vignette methodology to deal with self-reported, categorical data, the formal evaluation of the validity of this methodology is still a topic of research. Some critical assumptions need to hold in order for this method to be valid. In this paper we analyse the assumption of “vignette equivalence” using data on health system responsiveness contained within the World Health Survey. We perform several tests to check the assumption of vignette equivalence. First, we use a test based on the global ordering of the vignettes. A minimal condition for the assumption of vignette equivalence to hold is that individual responses are consistent with the global ordering of vignettes. Secondly, using the HOPIT model on the pool of countries, we undertake sensitivity analyses, stratifying countries according to the Inglehart-Welzel scale and the Human Development Index. The results of this analysis are robust, suggesting that the vignette equivalence assumption is not contradicted. Thirdly, we model the reporting behaviour of the respondents through a two-step regression procedure to evaluate whether the vignettes construct is perceived by respondents in different ways. Overall, across the analyses the results do not contradict the assumption of vignette equivalence and accordingly lend support to the use of the vignette methodology when analysing self-reported data and health system responsiveness.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10198-010-0235-5
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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 Info

Article provided by Springer in its journal The European Journal of Health Economics.

Volume (Year): 12 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (April)
Pages: 141-162

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:12:y:2011:i:2:p:141-162

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/10198/index.htm

Order Information:
Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm

Related research

Keywords: Health system responsiveness; Anchoring vignettes; Vignette equivalence; Hierarchical ordered probit model; I10;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. van Soest, Arthur & Delaney, Liam & Harmon, Colm P. & Kapteyn, Arie & Smith, James P., 2007. "Validating the Use of Vignettes for Subjective Threshold Scales," IZA Discussion Papers 2860, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  2. Datta Gupta, Nabanita & Kristensen, Nicolai & Pozzoli, Dario, 2009. "External Validation of the Use of Vignettes in Cross-Country Health Studies," IZA Discussion Papers 3989, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  3. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2009. "Slipping Anchor? Testing the Vignettes Approach to Identification and Correction of Reporting Heterogeneity," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-091/3, Tinbergen Institute.
  4. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Eddy Van Doorslaer & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell, 2008. "Does reporting heterogeneity bias the measurement of health disparities?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 351-375.
  5. Kristensen, Nicolai & Johansson, Edvard, 2008. "New evidence on cross-country differences in job satisfaction using anchoring vignettes," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 96-117, February.
  6. Nicolas Sirven & Brigitte Santos-Eggimann & Jacques Spagnoli, 2008. "Comparability of Health Care Responsiveness in Europe using anchoring vignettes from SHARE," Working Papers DT15, IRDES institut for research and information in health economics, revised Sep 2008.
  7. Rice, N & Robone, S & Smith, P.C, 2008. "International Comparison of Public Sector Performance: The Use of Anchoring Vignettes to adjust Self-Reported Data," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 08/28, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
  8. Nigel Rice & Silvana Robone & Peter Smith, 2009. "Analysis of the Validity of the Vignette Approach to Correct for Heterogeneity in Reporting Health System Responsiveness," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 09/28, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Carmelo León & Jorge Araña & Javier León, 2013. "Correcting for Scale Perception Bias in Measuring Corruption: an Application to Chile and Spain," Social Indicators Research, Springer, vol. 114(3), pages 977-995, December.
  2. Andrew M. Jones; Nigel Rice, Silvana Robone; & Nigel Rice; & Silvana Robone:, 2012. "A comparison of parametric and non-parametric adjustments using vignettes for self-reported data," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 12/10, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
  3. Nigel Rice & Silvana Robone & Peter Smith, 2011. "Analysis of the validity of the vignette approach to correct for heterogeneity in reporting health system responsiveness," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 141-162, April.
  4. Omar Paccagnella, 2011. "Anchoring vignettes with sample selection due to non‐response," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 665-687, 07.
  5. Kapteyn, A. & Smith, J.P. & Soest, A.H.O. van, 2011. "Are Americans Really Less Happy With Their Incomes?," Discussion Paper 2011-059, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  6. Angelini, V.; & Cavapozzi, D.; & Corazzini L.; & Paccagnell O.;, 2011. "Do Danes and Italians Rate Life Satisfaction in the Same Way? Using Vignettes to Correct for Individual-Specific Scale Biases," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 11/20, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:12:y:2011:i:2:p:141-162. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) 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.