Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

GDP & Beyond – die europäische Perspektive

Contents:

Author Info

  • Christopher R. Bollinger
  • Barry T. Hirsch

Abstract

Earnings nonresponse in the Current Population Survey is roughly 30% in the monthly surveys and 20% in the annual March survey. Even if nonresponse is random, severe bias attaches to wage equation coefficient estimates on attributes not matched in the earnings imputation hot deck. If nonresponse is ignorable, unbiased estimates can be achieved by omitting imputed earners, yet little is known about whether or not CPS nonresponse is ignorable. Using sample frame measures to identify selection, we find clear-cut evidence among men but limited evidence among women for negative selection into response. Wage equation slope coefficients are affected little by selection but because of intercept shifts, wages for men and to a lesser extent women are understated, as are gender wage gaps. Selection is less severe among household heads/co-heads than among other household members.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://www.ratswd.de/download/RatSWD_WP_2010/RatSWD_WP_165.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by German Council for Social and Economic Data (RatSWD) in its series Working Paper Series of the German Council for Social and Economic Data with number 165.

as in new window
Length: 24
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:rsw:rswwps:rswwps165

Contact details of provider:
Email:
Web page: http://www.ratswd.de/eng/index.html
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: response bias; imputation; earnings nonresponse; gender gap; CPS;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

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.:
as in new window
  1. Cheti Nicoletti & Franco Peracchi, 2005. "Survey response and survey characteristics: microlevel evidence from the European Community Household Panel," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 168(4), pages 763-781.
  2. Christopher R. Bollinger & Barry T. Hirsch, 2006. "Match Bias from Earnings Imputation in the Current Population Survey: The Case of Imperfect Matching," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(3), pages 483-520, July.
  3. Bryan S. Graham & Cristine Campos de Xavier Pinto & Daniel Egel, 2008. "Inverse Probability Tilting for Moment Condition Models with Missing Data," NBER Working Papers 13981, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Hamermesh, Daniel S. & Donald, Stephen G., 2008. "The effect of college curriculum on earnings: An affinity identifier for non-ignorable non-response bias," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 479-491, June.
  5. Korinek, Anton & Mistiaen, Johan A. & Ravallion, Martin, 2007. "An econometric method of correcting for unit nonresponse bias in surveys," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 213-235, January.
  6. Barry T. Hirsch & Edward J. Schumacher, 2004. "Match Bias in Wage Gap Estimates Due to Earnings Imputation," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(3), pages 689-722, July.
  7. James J. Heckman & Paul A. LaFontaine, 2006. "Bias-Corrected Estimates of GED Returns," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(3), pages 661-700, July.
  8. Lee, Jungmin & Lee, Sokbae, 2011. "Does It Matter Who Responded to the Survey? Trends in the U.S. Gender Earnings Gap Revisited," IZA Discussion Papers 5512, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  9. 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.
  10. Little, Roderick J A, 1988. "Missing-Data Adjustments in Large Surveys," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 6(3), pages 287-96, July.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rsw:rswwps:rswwps165. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (RatSWD) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask RatSWD to update the entry or send us the correct address.

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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