IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

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

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

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.)

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://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2011.00717.x
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Royal Statistical Society in its journal Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society).

Volume (Year): 175 (2012)
Issue (Month): 1 (01)
Pages: 289-308

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:175:y:2012:i:1:p:289-308
Contact details of provider: Postal: 12 Errol Street, London EC1Y 8LX, United Kingdom
Phone: -44-171-638-8998
Fax: -44-171-256-7598
Web page: http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/rssa
Email:


More information through EDIRC

Order Information: Web: http://ordering.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/subs.asp?ref=1467-985X&doi=10.1111/(ISSN)1467-985X

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. Ruth Hancock & Geraldine Barker, 2005. "The quality of social security benefit data in the British Family Resources Survey: implications for investigating income support take-up by pensioners," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 168(1), pages 63-82.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

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.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.