This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Representative Wealth Data for Germany from the German SOEP : The Impact of Methodological Decisions around Imputation and the Choice of the Aggregation Unit

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Joachim R. Frick
Markus M. Grabka
Eva M. Sierminska

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The definition and operationalization of wealth information in population surveys and the corresponding microdata requires a wide range of more or less normative assumptions. However, the decisions made in both the pre- and post-data-collection stage may interfere considerably with the substantive research question. Looking at wealth data from the German SOEP, this paper focuses on the impact of collecting information at the individual rather than household level, and on "imputation and editing" as a means of dealing with measurement error. First, we assess how the choice of unit of aggregation or unit of analysis affects wealth distribution and inequality analysis. Obviously, when measured in "per capita household" terms, wealth is less unequally distributed than at the individual level. This is the result of significant redistribution within households, and also provides evidence of a significant persisting gender wealth gap. Secondly, we find multiple imputation to be an effective means of coping with selective nonresponse. There is a significant impact of imputation on the share of wealth holders (increasing on average by 15%) and also on aggregate wealth (plus 30%). However, with respect to inequality, the results are ambiguous. Looking at the major outcome variable for the whole population-net worth-the Gini coefficient decreases, whereas a top-sensitive measure doubles. The non-random selectivity built into the missing process and the consideration of this selectivity in the imputation process clearly contribute to this finding. Obviously, the treatment of measurement errors after data collection, especially with respect to the imputation of missing values, affects cross-national comparability and thus may require some cross-national harmonization of the imputation strategies applied to the various national datasets.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/56534/diw_sp0003.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) in its series SOEPpapers with number 3.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length: 34 p.
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:diw:diwsop:diw_sp3

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Mohrenstra�e 58, D-10117 Berlin
Phone: xx49-30-89789-283
Fax: xx49-30-89789-109
Email:
Web page: http://www.diw.de/gsoep
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Bibliothek).

Related research
Keywords: Wealth Item Non-response Multiple Imputation SOEP

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Microeconomic Data
I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

This item is featured on the following reading lists:
  1. SOEP based publications
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.:
  1. René Böheim & Stephen P. Jenkins, 2000. "Do Current Income and Annual Income Measures Provide Different Pictures of Britain's Income Distribution?," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 214, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. Joachim R. Frick & Markus M. Grabka & Jan Marcus, 2007. "Editing and Multiple Imputation of Item-Non-Response in the 2002 Wealth Module of the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP)," Data Documentation 18, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? A few items listed on IDEAS are over 2000 years old!

This page was last updated on 2008-8-29.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.