IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v175y2012i1p289-308.html

The impact of questioning method on measurement error in panel survey measures of benefit receipt: evidence from a validation study

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Lynn
  • Annette Jäckle
  • Stephen P. Jenkins
  • Emanuela Sala

Abstract

We assess measurement error in panel survey reports of social security benefit receipt, drawing on a unique validation study. Our aims are threefold. First, we quantify the incidence of measurement errors (under- and over-reporting). Second, we assess the extent to which this varies according to the questioning method that is used. Specifically, dependent interviewing has been proposed as a way to reduce under-reporting in some circumstances. We compare two versions of dependent interviewing with traditional independent interviewing in an experimental design. Third, we identify and assess new ways of reducing measurement error in panel surveys. We use data from a large-scale UK household panel survey and we consider six benefits. To assess the measurement error, a validation exercise was conducted, with administrative data on benefit receipt matched at the individual level to the survey microdata.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Lynn & Annette Jäckle & Stephen P. Jenkins & Emanuela Sala, 2012. "The impact of questioning method on measurement error in panel survey measures of benefit receipt: evidence from a validation study," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 175(1), pages 289-308, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:175:y:2012:i:1:p:289-308
    DOI: j.1467-985X.2011.00717.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2011.00717.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/j.1467-985X.2011.00717.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. H. Xavier Jara & Marcelo Varela, 2017. "Tax-benefit microsimulation and income redistribution in Ecuador," WIDER Working Paper Series 177, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Whitaker, Stephan D., 2018. "Big Data versus a survey," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 285-296.
    3. Mike Brewer & Ben Etheridge & Cormac O’Dea, 2017. "Why are Households that Report the Lowest Incomes So Well‐off?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 24-49, October.
    4. Lugtig Peter & Jäckle Annette, 2014. "Can I Just Check...? Effects of Edit Check Questions on Measurement Error and Survey Estimates," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 30(1), pages 45-62, March.
    5. Serena Pattaro & Nick Bailey & Chris Dibben, 2020. "Using Linked Longitudinal Administrative Data to Identify Social Disadvantage," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 865-895, February.
    6. Jennifer Roberts & Karl Taylor, 2022. "New Evidence on Disability Benefit Claims in Britain: The Role of Health and the Local Labour Market," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(353), pages 131-160, January.
    7. R. Bollinger, Christopher & Valentinova Tasseva, Iva, 2022. "Income source confusion using the SILC," ISER Working Paper Series 2022-04, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    8. Jäckle, Annette & Johannes, Eggs, 2014. "Dependent interviewing and sub-optimal responding," ISER Working Paper Series 2014-32, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    9. Luis Ayala & Ana Pérez & Mercedes Prieto-Alaiz, 2022. "The impact of different data sources on the level and structure of income inequality," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 583-611, September.
    10. H Xavier Jara & Marcelo Varela, 2019. "Tax-benefit Microsimulation and Income Redistribution in Ecuador," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 12(1), pages 52-82.
    11. Paul Fisher & Omar Hussein, 2023. "Understanding Society: the income data," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 377-397, December.
    12. Bruckmeier, Kerstin & Riphahn, Regina T. & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2019. "Benefit underreporting in survey data and its consequences for measuring non-take-up: new evidence from linked administrative and survey data," IAB-Discussion Paper 201906, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    13. Paul Fisher, 2019. "Does Repeated Measurement Improve Income Data Quality?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 81(5), pages 989-1011, October.
    14. Brian Bucks & Karen Pence, 2015. "Wealth, pensions, debt, and savings: Considerations for a panel survey," Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, IOS Press, issue 1-4, pages 151-175.
    15. repec:esx:essedp:736 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Tasseva, Iva Valentinova, 2016. "Evaluating the performance of means-tested benefits in Bulgaria," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 919-935.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General

    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:bla:jorssa:v:175:y:2012:i:1:p:289-308. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.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.