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! ]

What Do We Really Know About Wages? New Evidence From A Natural Experiment

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
John A. Bishop
John Formby
Paul D. Thistle
Abstract

Lilliard, Smith and Welch (1986) note the rising proportion of workers whose earnings go unreported in the Current Population Survey and argue that the Census Bureau's imputation procedure fails to account for the positive correlation between nonresponse and income. As a consequence, an imputation or reporting bias is substituted for the nonresponse bias with unclear implications for what we really know about wages. In 1989 the processing system for compiling CPS data was substantially revised. To permit users of the public use tapes to judge the comparability of the data under the two processing systems, the Census Bureau issued two March 1989 CPS tapes containing earnings imputed under the old and the new system. The distinguishing characteristic of the old procedure was that if one piece of information was missing from an interview, then all items were imputed. The new imputation procedure imputes only the true missing values.

Combining individual level data from both processing systems provides a natural experiment that sheds new light on Lilliard, Smith, and Welch's question--What Do we Really Know About Wages? We exploit the earnings data for the same individuals in several ways. First, we investigate erasure bias by estimating earnings equations based on both the old and the new CPS processing system data. Second, we analyze reporting bias by estimating a nonresponse probit and using the inverse Mills ratio to correct the earnings equation for reporting bias. Third, we explore the important question of model bias in the imputation of earnings. We find that for white males the effect of correcting for reporting bias dramatically increases the returns to education. In addition to stressing the importance of reporting bias in the pre-1989 data, our results indicate that failure to correct for nonparticipation is a serious and continuing problem in the post-1989 CPS processing system.

Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by East Carolina University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 9723.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wop:eacaec:9723

Note: For a copy of the paper, e-mail: bishopj@mail.ecu.edu
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Brewster A-427, 10th Street, Greenville, NC 27858
Phone: (252) 328-6006
Fax: (252) 328-6743
Email:
Web page: http://www.econ.ecu.edu/wp/
More information through EDIRC

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

Related research
Keywords:

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Over five million full texts a year are downloaded through IDEAS.

This page was last updated on 2008-10-3.


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.