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! ]

Identification, Characteristics and Impact of Faked Interviews in Surveys An analysis by means of genuine fakes in the raw data of SOEP

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Schraepler, Joerg-Peter (Ruhr University Bochum and DIW Berlin)
Wagner, Gert G. () (DIW Berlin, Berlin University of Technology (TUB) and IZA Bonn)

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

Abstract

To the best of our knowledge, most of the few methodological studies which analyze the impact of faked interviews on survey results are based on “artificial fakes” generated by project students in a “laboratory environment”. In contrast, panel data provide a unique opportunity to identify data which are actually faked by interviewers. By comparing data of two waves almost all fakes are easily identifiable. So the raw data of the German Socio- Economic Panel Study (SOEP) provide a rich source of faked interviews because it is built on several sub-samples. However, because interviewers know that panel respondents will be interviewed again over the course of time, clever interviewers will not fake panel interviews. In fact, in raw data of SOEP the share is about only 0.5 percent of all records. The fakes are used for an analysis of the potential impact of non detected fakes on survey results. The major result is that the faked records have no impact on the mean and the proportions. But in very rare, exceptional cases there may be a bias in estimates of correlations and regression coefficients if fakes would not be detected. One should note that – except for some fakes in the first two waves of sample E – faked data were never disseminated within the widely-used SOEP. The fakes were detected before the data were released.

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: ftp://repec.iza.org/RePEc/Discussionpaper/dp969.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in its series IZA Discussion Papers with number 969.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length: 34 pages
Date of creation: Dec 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp969

Contact details of provider:
Postal: IZA, P.O. Box 7240, D-53072 Bonn, Germany
Phone: +49 228 3894 223
Fax: +49 228 3894 180
Web page: http://www.iza.org

Order Information:
Postal: IZA, Margard Ody, P.O. Box 7240, D-53072 Bonn, Germany
Email:

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

Related research
Keywords: Benford’s law cheating curbstoning faked interviews quality control SOEP

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
C8 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs
C4 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Authors can create their own profile with links to their works on the RePEc Author Service.

This page was last updated on 2008-8-18.

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.