Attrition and misclassification of drop-outs in the analysis of unemployment duration
AbstractCarling et al (1996) analyze a large data set of unemployed workers in order to examine, inter alia, the effect of unemployment benefits on the escape rate to employment. In this paper we take a closer look at the 20 per cent of workers who were drop-outs and check the empirical justification for modeling attrition as independent right censoring in the analysis of unemployment duration. It may very well be that dropping out, i.e. attrition, often occurs due to employment. In the analysis, we refer to these individuals as misclassified in that they are typically treated as if their unemployment spell went beyond the time of attrition. We propose to follow up the drop-outs by a supplementary sample and apply a Multiple Imputation approach to incorporate the supplementary information. Our follow-up study revealed that 45% dropped out due to employment. The escape rate to employment was as a consequence under-estimated by 20 per cent, implying that the effect of unemployment benefits on the escape rate is likely to be much greater than reported in Carling et al (1996)
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 IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy in its series Working Paper Series with number 2001:3.
Length: 15 pages
Date of creation: 01 Sep 1998
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Journal of Official Statistics, 2000, pages 321-330.
Follow-up study; Informative censoring; Multiple imputation; Register data; Survival models;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C41 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Duration Analysis; Optimal Timing Strategies
- C42 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Survey Methods
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.:
- Meyer, Bruce D, 1990.
"Unemployment Insurance and Unemployment Spells,"
Econometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 757-82, July.
- 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 455-73, March.
- Kiefer, Nicholas M, 1988. "Economic Duration Data and Hazard Functions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(2), pages 646-79, June.
- Carling, Kenneth & Edin, Per-Anders & Harkman, Anders & Holmlund, Bertil, 1996. "Unemployment duration, unemployment benefits, and labor market programs in Sweden," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 313-334, March.
- Lancaster, Tony, 1979. "Econometric Methods for the Duration of Unemployment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(4), pages 939-56, July.
- Carling, Kenneth & Gustafson, Lena, 1999. "Self-employment grants vs. subsidized employment: Is there a difference in the re-unemployment risk?," Working Paper Series 1999:6, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Margareta Wicklander).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.