IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20090091.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Slipping Anchor? Testing the Vignettes Approach to Identification and Correction of Reporting Heterogeneity

Author

Listed:
  • Teresa Bago d'Uva

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam, and Netspar)

  • Maarten Lindeboom

    (VU University Amsterdam, and Netspar)

  • Owen O'Donnell

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam, University of Macedonia, University of Lausanne, and Netspar)

  • Eddy van Doorslaer

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

Abstract

This discussion paper led to a publication in 'The Journal of Human Resources', 2011, 46(4), 875-906. . Anchoring vignettes are increasingly used to identify and correct heterogeneity in the reporting of health, work disability, life satisfaction, political efficacy, etc. with the aim of improving interpersonal comparability of subjective indicators of these constructs. The method relies on two assumptions: vignette equivalence – the vignette description is perceived by all to correspond to the same state; and, response consistency - individuals use the same response scales to rate the vignettes and their own situation. We propose tests of these assumptions. For vignette equivalence, we test a necessary condition of no systematic variation with observed characteristics in the perceived difference in states corresponding to any two vignettes. To test response consistency we rely on the assumption that objective indicators fully capture the covariation between the construct of interest and observed individual characteristics, and so offer an alternative way to identify response scales, which can then be compared with those identified from the vignettes. We also introduce a weaker test that is valid under a less stringent assumption. We apply these tests to cognitive functioning and mobility related health problems using data from the English Longitudinal Survey of Ageing. Response consistency is rejected for both health domains according to the first test, but the weaker test does not reject for cognitive functioning. The necessary condition for vignette equivalence is rejected for both health domains. These results cast some doubt on the validity of the vignettes approach, at least as applied to these health domains.

Suggested Citation

  • Teresa Bago d'Uva & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2009. "Slipping Anchor? Testing the Vignettes Approach to Identification and Correction of Reporting Heterogeneity," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-091/3, Tinbergen Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20090091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/09091.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wagstaff, Adam & Paci, Pierella & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 1991. "On the measurement of inequalities in health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 545-557, January.
    2. van Soest, Arthur & Delaney, Liam & Harmon, Colm P. & Kapteyn, Arie & Smith, James P., 2007. "Validating the Use of Vignettes for Subjective Threshold Scales," IZA Discussion Papers 2860, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Rice, N & Robone, S & Smith, P.C, 2008. "International Comparison of Public Sector Performance: The Use of Anchoring Vignettes to adjust Self-Reported Data," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 08/28, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    4. Nigel Rice & Silvana Robone & Peter Smith, 2011. "Analysis of the validity of the vignette approach to correct for heterogeneity in reporting health system responsiveness," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 12(2), pages 141-162, April.
    5. Arie Kapteyn & James P. Smith & Arthur van Soest, 2007. "Vignettes and Self-Reports of Work Disability in the United States and the Netherlands," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 461-473, March.
    6. repec:ucn:wpaper:10197/580 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Eddy van Doorslaer & Xander Koolman & Andrew M. Jones, 2004. "Explaining income‐related inequalities in doctor utilisation in Europe," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(7), pages 629-647, July.
    8. James Banks & Zoe Oldfield, 2007. "Understanding Pensions: Cognitive Function, Numerical Ability and Retirement Saving," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 28(2), pages 143-170, June.
    9. Marcel Kerkhofs & Maarten Lindeboom, 1995. "Subjective health measures and state dependent reporting errors," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 4(3), pages 221-235, May.
    10. Fabrice Etilé & Carine Milcent, 2006. "Income‐related reporting heterogeneity in self‐assessed health: evidence from France," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(9), pages 965-981, September.
    11. Lindeboom, Maarten & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2004. "Cut-point shift and index shift in self-reported health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 1083-1099, November.
    12. Hugo Benitez-Silva & Moshe Buchinsky & Hiu-Man Chan & Sofia Cheidvasser & John Rust, 1999. "How Large is the BIas in Self-Reported Disability Status?," Department of Economics Working Papers 99-02, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    13. Kristensen, Nicolai & Johansson, Edvard, 2008. "New evidence on cross-country differences in job satisfaction using anchoring vignettes," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 96-117, February.
    14. Hana Voňková & Patrick Hullegie, 2011. "Is the anchoring vignette method sensitive to the domain and choice of the vignette?," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 597-620, July.
    15. John Bound, 1991. "Self-Reported Versus Objective Measures of Health in Retirement Models," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 26(1), pages 106-138.
    16. Robert B. Wallace & A. Regula Herzog, 1995. "Overview of the Health Measures in the Health and Retirement Study," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30, pages 84-107.
    17. Disney, Richard & Emmerson, Carl & Wakefield, Matthew, 2006. "Ill health and retirement in Britain: A panel data-based analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 621-649, July.
    18. Steven Stern, 1989. "Measuring the Effect of Disability on Labor Force Participation," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 24(3), pages 361-395.
    19. Arthur van Soest & Liam Delaney & Colm Harmon & Arie Kapteyn & James P. Smith, 2011. "Validating the use of anchoring vignettes for the correction of response scale differences in subjective questions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(3), pages 575-595, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Eddy Van Doorslaer & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O'Donnell, 2008. "Does reporting heterogeneity bias the measurement of health disparities?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 351-375, March.
    2. Johnston, David W. & Propper, Carol & Shields, Michael A., 2009. "Comparing subjective and objective measures of health: Evidence from hypertension for the income/health gradient," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 540-552, May.
    3. Greene, William & Harris, Mark N. & Knott, Rachel & Rice, Nigel, 2023. "Reporting heterogeneity in modeling self-assessed survey outcomes," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    4. William H. Greene & Mark N. Harris & Rachel J. Knott & Nigel Rice, 2021. "Specification and testing of hierarchical ordered response models with anchoring vignettes," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(1), pages 31-64, January.
    5. Brent Kreider & John Pepper, 2008. "Inferring disability status from corrupt data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 329-349.
    6. Gimenez-Nadal, J. Ignacio & Molina, Jose Alberto, 2015. "Health status and the allocation of time: Cross-country evidence from Europe," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 188-203.
    7. Sarah Brown & Jennifer Roberts & Karl Taylor, 2010. "Reservation wages, labour market participation and health," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 173(3), pages 501-529, July.
    8. Davillas, Apostolos & de Oliveira, Victor Hugo & Jones, Andrew M., 2023. "Is inconsistent reporting of self-assessed health persistent and systematic? Evidence from the UKHLS," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    9. Raskina, Yulia & Podkorytova, Olga & Kuchakov, Ruslan, 2022. "Health determinants and the reporting heterogeneity bias in Russia: Anchoring vignettes approach," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 66, pages 118-143.
    10. Aparajita Dasgupta, 2018. "Systematic measurement error in self-reported health: is anchoring vignettes the way out?," IZA Journal of Migration and Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-30, December.
    11. Zhiyong Huang & Haoxian Wang & Wenyuan Zheng, 2021. "An extended hierarchical ordered probit model robust to heteroskedastic vignette perceptions with an application to functional limitation assessment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-19, March.
    12. Udo Schneider & Christian Pfarr & Brit Schneider & Volker Ulrich, 2012. "I feel good! Gender differences and reporting heterogeneity in self-assessed health," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(3), pages 251-265, June.
    13. Laura Rossouw & Teresa Bago d’Uva & Eddy Doorslaer, 2018. "Poor Health Reporting? Using Anchoring Vignettes to Uncover Health Disparities by Wealth and Race," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(5), pages 1935-1956, October.
    14. Andrew M. Jones & Eddy Van Doorslaer & Teresa Bago D’Uva & Silvia Balia & Lynn Gambin & Cristina Hernández Quevedo & Xander Koolman & Nigel Rice, 2006. "Health and Wealth: Empirical Findings and Political Consequences," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 7(s1), pages 93-112, May.
    15. Brown, Sarah & Harris, Mark N. & Srivastava, Preety & Taylor, Karl, 2018. "Mental Health and Reporting Bias: Analysis of the GHQ-12," IZA Discussion Papers 11771, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Costa-Font, Joan & Hernández-Quevedo, Cristina, 2012. "Measuring inequalities in health: What do we know? What do we need to know?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 195-206.
    17. Zucchelli, E. & Harris, M. & Zhao, X., 2012. "Ill-health and transitions to part-time work and self-employment among older workers," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 12/04, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    18. J. Ignacio Gimenez-Nadal & Jose Alberto Molina, 2016. "Health inequality and the uses of time for workers in Europe: policy implications," IZA Journal of European Labor Studies, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, December.
    19. Mark N. Harris & Xueyan Zhao & Eugenio Zucchelli, 2021. "Ageing Workforces, Ill‐health and Multi‐state Labour Market Transitions," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(1), pages 199-227, February.
    20. Pfarr, Christian & Schmid, Andreas & Schneider, Udo, 2011. "Reporting Heterogeneity in Self-Assessed Health among Elderly Europeans: The Impact of Mental and Physical Health Status," MPRA Paper 29900, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Reporting heterogeneity; Survey methods; Vignettes; Health; Cognition;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
    • C42 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Survey Methods
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:tin:wpaper:20090091. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.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.