IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v176y2013i2p499-519.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experiments with methods to reduce attrition in longitudinal surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Laura Fumagalli
  • Heather Laurie
  • Peter Lynn

Abstract

We conduct two large-scale randomised experiments on the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS) to study methods of reducing panel attrition. The first experiment compares different strategies for tracing and maintaining contact with sample members. We find that change-of-address cards conditional on moving are most effective both in increasing response rates and in reducing fieldwork costs. The second experiment substitutes the standard between-wave Respondent Report with reports tailored for specific categories of respondents. We find that tailored reports have a positive though small effect on the number of young people completing a face-to-face interview and increase cooperation for busy people when telephone interviews are included.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Laura Fumagalli & Heather Laurie & Peter Lynn, 2013. "Experiments with methods to reduce attrition in longitudinal surveys," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(2), pages 499-519, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:176:y:2013:i:2:p:499-519
    DOI: j.1467-985X.2012.01051.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2012.01051.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/j.1467-985X.2012.01051.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 search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey E. Zabel, 1998. "An Analysis of Attrition in the Panel Study of Income Dynamics and the Survey of Income and Program Participation with an Application to a Model of Labor Market Behavior," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 479-506.
    2. Katharine G. Abraham & Aaron Maitland & Suzanne M. Bianchi, 2006. "Non-response in the American Time Use Survey: Who Is Missing from the Data and How Much Does It Matter?," NBER Technical Working Papers 0328, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. John Fitzgerald & Peter Gottschalk & Robert Moffitt, 1998. "An Analysis of Sample Attrition in Panel Data: The Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 251-299.
    4. Coen, Anita Saranga & Patrick, Diane C. & Shern, David L., 1996. "Minimizing attrition in longitudinal studies of special populations: An integrated management approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 309-319, November.
    5. Lynn, Peter & Laurie, Heather, 2008. "The use of respondent incentives on longitudinal surveys," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-42, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    6. Lynn, Peter & S. Clarke, Paul, 2001. "Separating refusal bias and non-contact bias: evidence from UK national surveys," ISER Working Paper Series 2001-24, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    7. Jonathan Burton & Heather Laurie & Peter Lynn, 2006. "The long‐term effectiveness of refusal conversion procedures on longitudinal surveys," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 459-478, July.
    8. Noah Uhrig, S.C., 2008. "The nature and causes of attrition in the British Household Panel Study," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-05, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Toomse, Mari, 2010. "Looking for a middle class bias: salary and co-operation in social surveys," ISER Working Paper Series 2010-03, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    2. McGonagle Katherine A. & Schoeni Robert F. & Couper Mick P., 2013. "The Effects of a Between-Wave Incentive Experiment on Contact Update and Production Outcomes in a Panel Study," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 29(2), pages 261-276, September.
    3. Lynn, Peter, 2013. "Targeted response inducement strategies on longitudinal surveys," Understanding Society Working Paper Series 2013-02, Understanding Society at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    4. Peter Lynn & Pablo Cabrera‐Álvarez & Paul Clarke, 2023. "Sample composition and representativeness on Understanding Society," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 341-359, December.
    5. Carine Burricand & Jean-Paul Lorgnet, 2014. "L’attrition dans l’enquête SRCV : déterminants et effets sur la mesure des variables monétaires," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 469(1), pages 19-35.
    6. Plewis Ian & Shlomo Natalie, 2017. "Using Response Propensity Models to Improve the Quality of Response Data in Longitudinal Studies," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(3), pages 753-779, September.

    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. Nicole Watson & Mark Wooden, 2011. "Re-engaging with Survey Non-respondents: The BHPS, SOEP and HILDA Survey Experience," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2011n02, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    2. Adrian Chadi, 2019. "Dissatisfied with life or with being interviewed? Happiness and the motivation to participate in a survey," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 519-553, October.
    3. Switek, Maggie, 2012. "Internal Migration and Life Satisfaction: Well-Being Effects of Moving as a Young Adult," IZA Discussion Papers 7016, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Sadig, Husam, 2014. "Unknown eligibility whilst weighting for non-response: the puzzle of who has died and who is still alive?," ISER Working Paper Series 2014-35, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    5. Teresa Molina Millán & Karen Macours, 2017. "Attrition in randomized control trials: Using tracking information to correct bias," FEUNL Working Paper Series novaf:wp1702, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Economia.
    6. Fitzsimons, Emla & Malde, Bansi & Mesnard, Alice & Vera-Hernández, Marcos, 2016. "Nutrition, information and household behavior: Experimental evidence from Malawi," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 113-126.
    7. Michael Fertig & Stefanie Schurer, 2007. "Earnings Assimilation of Immigrants in Germany: The Importance of Heterogeneity and Attrition Bias," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 30, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    8. Nic Baigrie & Katherine Eyal, 2014. "An Evaluation of the Determinants and Implications of Panel Attrition in the National Income Dynamics Survey (2008-2010)," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 82(1), pages 39-65, March.
    9. Shin, Jaeun & Moon, Sangho, 2006. "Fertility, relative wages, and labor market decisions: A case of female teachers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 591-604, December.
    10. Oliver Lipps & Florence Moreau-Gruet, 2010. "Change of individual BMI in Switzerland and the USA: a multilevel model for growth," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 55(4), pages 299-306, August.
    11. Thomas, Duncan & Witoelar, Firman & Frankenberg, Elizabeth & Sikoki, Bondan & Strauss, John & Sumantri, Cecep & Suriastini, Wayan, 2012. "Cutting the costs of attrition: Results from the Indonesia Family Life Survey," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 108-123.
    12. Mesnard, Alice & Vera-Hernández, Marcos & Fitzsimons, Emla & Malde, Bansi, 2012. "Household Responses to Information on Child Nutrition: Experimental Evidence from Malawi," CEPR Discussion Papers 8915, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Tsai, Yuping, 2010. "Returns to overeducation: A longitudinal analysis of the U.S. labor market," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 606-617, August.
    14. Jack DeWaard & Janna Johnson & Stephan D. Whitaker, 2019. "Internal Migration in the United States: A Comprehensive Comparative Assessment of the Consumer Credit Panel," Working Papers 18-04R, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    15. Molina Millán, Teresa & Macours, Karen, 2017. "Attrition in Randomized Control Trials: Using Tracking Information to Correct Bias," IZA Discussion Papers 10711, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. repec:zbw:rwirep:0020 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Jonathan Burton & Heather Laurie & Peter Lynn, 2006. "The long‐term effectiveness of refusal conversion procedures on longitudinal surveys," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 459-478, July.
    18. Malgorzata Switek, 2016. "Internal Migration and Life Satisfaction: Well-Being Paths of Young Adult Migrants," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 191-241, January.
    19. Fertig, Michael & Schurer, Stefanie, 2007. "Labour Market Outcomes of Immigrants in Germany: The Importance of Heterogeneity and Attrition Bias," IZA Discussion Papers 2915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Malgorzata Switek & Richard A. Easterlin, 2018. "Life Transitions and Life Satisfaction During Young Adulthood," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 297-314, January.
    21. Gouskova, Elena, 2014. "Parameter estimates comparison of earnings functions in the PSID and CPS data, 1976–2007," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 353-357.

    More about this item

    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:176:y:2013:i:2:p:499-519. 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: 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.