IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mol/ecsdps/esdp04015.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Survey response and survey characteristics: Micro-level evidence from the ECHP

Author

Listed:
  • Nicoletti, Cheti
  • Peracchi, Franco

Abstract

This paper presents some micro-level evidence on the role of the socio-demographic characteristics of the population and the characteristics of the data collection process as predictors of survey response. Our evidence is based on the public use files of the European Community Household Panel (ECHP), a longitudinal household survey covering the countries of the European Union, whose attractive feature is the high level of comparability across countries and over time. We use individual-level information to predict response in the next wave given response in the current wave, focusing on how the probabilities of contact failure and refusal to cooperate vary with the socio-demographic composition of the national populations and the characteristics of the data collection process. We model the response process as the outcome of two sequential events; (i) the contact between the interviewer and an eligible interviewee, and (ii) the cooperation of the interviewee. Our model allows for dependence between the ease of contact and the propensity to cooperate, taking into account the censoring problem caused by the fact that we observe whether a person is a respondent only if she has been contacted.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicoletti, Cheti & Peracchi, Franco, 2004. "Survey response and survey characteristics: Micro-level evidence from the ECHP," Economics & Statistics Discussion Papers esdp04015, University of Molise, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:mol:ecsdps:esdp04015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://web.unimol.it/progetti/repec/mol/ecsdps/ESDP04015.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. O'Connell, Philip J. & Russell, Helen & FitzGerald, John, 2006. "Human Resources," Book Chapters, in: Morgenroth, Edgar (ed.),Ex-Ante Evaluation of the Investment Priorities for the National Development Plan 2007-2013, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    2. John Fitzgerald & Peter Gottschalk & Robert Moffitt, 1998. "An Analysis of Sample Attrition in Panel Data: The Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 251-299.
    3. Pamela Campanelli & Colm O'Muircheartaigh, 2002. "The Importance of Experimental Control in Testing the Impact of Interviewer Continuity on Panel Survey Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 129-144, May.
    4. Francis Vella, 1998. "Estimating Models with Sample Selection Bias: A Survey," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(1), pages 127-169.
    5. JM Abowd & Bruno Crépon & Francis Kramarz, 1997. "Moment Estimation with Attrition," Working Papers 97-35, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    6. Morimune, Kimio, 1979. "Comparisons of Normal and Logistic Models in the Bivariate Dichotomous Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(4), pages 957-975, July.
    7. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    8. Franco Peracchi, 2002. "The European Community Household Panel: A review," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 63-90.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Del Boca, Daniela & Sauer, Robert M., 2009. "Life cycle employment and fertility across institutional environments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 274-292, April.
    2. Nicole Watson & Roger Wilkins, 2012. "The Impact of Computer-Assisted Interviewing on Interview Length," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2012n10, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    3. Andrew E. Clark, 2006. "A Note on Unhappiness and Unemployment Duration," Applied Economics Quarterly (formerly: Konjunkturpolitik), Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 52(4), pages 291-308.
    4. María Angeles Davia & Oscar D. Marcenaro Gutiérrez, 2008. "Exploring the link between employment search time and reservation," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 186(3), pages 91-121, October.
    5. María A. Davia & Óscar D. Marcenaro-Gutiérrez, 2007. "Exploring the link between employment search time and reservation wages in Southern Europe," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2007/13, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    6. Nicole Watson & Roger Wilkins, 2012. "Experimental Change from Paper-Based Interviewing to Computer-Assisted Interviewing in the HILDA Survey," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2012n06, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cheti Nicoletti & Franco Peracchi & Vincenzo Atella, 2005. "Survey Response and Survey Characteristics: Micro-level Evidence from the European Commission Household Panel," CEIS Research Paper 64, Tor Vergata University, CEIS.
    2. Cheti Nicoletti & Marco Francesconi, 2006. "Intergenerational mobility and sample selection in short panels," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(8), pages 1265-1293.
    3. Nicoletti, Cheti & Peracchi, Franco, 2002. "A cross-country comparison of survey nonparticipation in the ECHP -ISER working paper-," ISER Working Paper Series 2002-32, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    4. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder & Donald B. Rubin, 2001. "Combining Panel Data Sets with Attrition and Refreshment Samples," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1645-1659, November.
    5. Michael Fertig & Stefanie Schurer, 2007. "Earnings Assimilation of Immigrants in Germany: The Importance of Heterogeneity and Attrition Bias," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 30, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    6. Shin, Jaeun & Moon, Sangho, 2006. "Fertility, relative wages, and labor market decisions: A case of female teachers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 591-604, December.
    7. ter Horst, Jenke R. & Nijman, Theo E. & Verbeek, Marno, 2001. "Eliminating look-ahead bias in evaluating persistence in mutual fund performance," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 345-373, September.
    8. Dan A. Black & Lars Skipper & Jeffrey A. Smith & Jeffrey Andrew Smith, 2023. "Firm Training," CESifo Working Paper Series 10268, CESifo.
    9. Behr Andreas, 2006. "Comparing Estimation Strategies for Income Equations in the Presence of Panel Attrition: Empirical Results Based on the ECHP," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 226(4), pages 361-384, August.
    10. Fertig, Michael & Schurer, Stefanie, 2007. "Labour Market Outcomes of Immigrants in Germany: The Importance of Heterogeneity and Attrition Bias," IZA Discussion Papers 2915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Farshid Vahid & Pushkar Maitra, 2005. "The Effect of Household Characteristics on Living Standards in South Africa 1993 - 98: A Quantile Regression Analysis with Sample Attrition," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2005-452, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    12. Luis Ayala & Carolina Navarro & Mercedes Sastre, 2011. "Cross-country income mobility comparisons under panel attrition: the relevance of weighting schemes," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(25), pages 3495-3521.
    13. Cheti Nicoletti, 2010. "Poverty analysis with missing data: alternative estimators compared," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-22, February.
    14. Marcel Das & Vera Toepoel & Arthur van Soest, 2011. "Nonparametric Tests of Panel Conditioning and Attrition Bias in Panel Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(1), pages 32-56, February.
    15. Nicoletti, Cheti & Buck, Nick, 2004. "Explaining interviewee contact and co-operation in the British and German Household Panels," ISER Working Paper Series 2004-06, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    16. Martin Huber, 2014. "Treatment Evaluation in the Presence of Sample Selection," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(8), pages 869-905, November.
    17. Giuseppe De Luca & Franco Peracchi, 2012. "Estimating Engel curves under unit and item nonresponse," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(7), pages 1076-1099, November.
    18. 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, July.
    19. Giuseppe De Luca & Franco Peracchi, 2007. "A sample selection model for unit and item nonresponse in cross-sectional surveys," CEIS Research Paper 95, Tor Vergata University, CEIS.
    20. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Wechsler, Seth James, 2012. "Fifteen Years Later: Examining the Adoption of Bt Corn Varieties by U.S. Farmers," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124257, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Panel data; survey response; bivariate probit model.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C33 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mol:ecsdps:esdp04015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Claudio Lupi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dsmolit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.