Relating Question Type to Panel Conditioning: A Comparison between Trained and Fresh Respondents
AbstractPanel conditioning arises if respondents are influenced by participation in previous surveys, such that their answers differ significantly from the answers of individuals who are interviewed for the first time. Having two panels—a trained one and a completely fresh one—created a unique opportunity for analysing panel conditioning effects. To determine which type of question is sensitive to panel conditioning, 981 trained respondents and 2809 fresh respondents answered nine questions with different question types. The results in this paper show that panel conditioning only arise in knowledge questions. Questions on attitudes, actual behaviour, or facts were not sensitive to panel conditioning. Panel conditioning in knowledge questions was restricted to less-known subjects (more difficult questions), suggesting a relation between panel conditioning and cognition.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research in its series Discussion Paper with number 2008-4.
Date of creation: 2008
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://center.uvt.nl
panel conditioning; re-interviewing; measurement error; panel surveys;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C42 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Survey Methods
- C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data
- C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- John Feddersen & Robert Metcalfe & Mark Wooden, 2012.
"Subjective Well-Being: Weather Matters; Climate Doesn't,"
Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series
wp2012n25, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
- Robert Metcalfe & John Feddersen & Mark Wooden, 2012. "Subjective Well-Being: Weather Matters; Climate Doesn't," Economics Series Working Papers 627, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Richard Broekman).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.