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! ]

How Large is the BIas in Self-Reported Disability Status?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Hugo Benitez-Silva, Moshe Buchinsky, Hiu-Man Chan, Sofia Cheidvasser and John Rust ()

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

Abstract

A pervasive concern with the use of self-reported health and disability measures in behavioral models is that they are biased and endogenous. A commonly suggested explanation is that survey respondents exaggerate the severity of health problems and incidence of disabilities in order to rationalize labor force non-participation, application for disability benefits and/or receipt of those benefits. This paper re-examines this issue using a self-reported indicator of disability status from the Health and Retirement Survey. Using a bivariate probit model we test and are unable to reject the hypothesis that the self-reported disability measure is an exogenous explanatory variable in a model of individual's decision to apply for DI benefits or Social Security Administration's decision to award benefits. We further study a subsample of individuals who applied for Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income benefits from the Social Security Administration (SSA) for whom we can also observe SSA's award/deny decision. For this subsample we test and are unable to reject the hypothesis that self-reported disability is health and socio-economic characteristics similar to the information used by the SSA in making its award decisions. The unbiasedness restriction implies that these two variables have the same conditional probability distributions. Thus, our results indicate that disability applicant do not exaggerate their disability status at least in anonymous surveys such as the HRS. Indeed, our results are consistent with the hypothesis that disability applicants are aware of the criteria and decision rules that SSA uses in making awards and act as if they were applying these same criteria and rules when reporting their own disability status.

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 page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sunysb.edu/economics/research/papers/1999/99-02.pdf
Our checks indicate that this address may not be valid because: 404 Not Found. If this is indeed the case, please notify (Silvio Rendon)
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Stony Brook University, Department of Economics in its series Department of Economics Working Papers with number 99-02.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 49
Date of creation: 1999
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:nys:sunysb:99-02

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Stony Brook, NY 11794-4384
Phone: (631)632-7540
Fax: (631)632-7516
Email:
Web page: http://www.sunysb.edu/economics
More information through EDIRC

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

Related research
Keywords: Social Security; Disability; Health and Retirement Survey; Conditional Moment Tests;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H5 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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. Hugo Benitez-Silva and Sofia Sheidvasser, 2000. "The Educated Russian's Curse: Returns to Education in the Russian Federation," Department of Economics Working Papers 00-05, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
  2. Maarten Lindeboom & Marcel Kerkhofs, 2004. "Subjective Health Measures, Reporting Errors and Endogeneity in the Relationship Between Health and Work," CEIS Research Paper 46, Tor Vergata University, CEIS. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You too can volunteer for RePEc, for example by providing information about publications in your institution.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-16.


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.