IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v34y2016i11.html

Reliability of retrospective event histories within the German Generations and Gender Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Kerstin Ruckdeschel

    (Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung (BiB))

  • Lenore Sauer

    (Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung (BiB))

  • Robert Naderi

    (Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung (BiB))

Abstract

Background: In order to explain demographic phenomena, the Generations and Gender Survey covers a wide variety of demographic topics. Such a survey requires elaborate survey design and implementation. Previous research has shown problems with the complex parts of retrospective fertility data and retrospective partnership data in the German GGS. Until now, no satisfying explanations have been given for these distortions. Objective: In this paper we investigate if the distortions in the German GGS can be explained by questionnaire design factors or by survey implementation, with special regard to rational behaviour of the interviewers and interviewees. Methods: Using the fertility and partnership histories in the first wave of the German GGS of 2005, we checked for fatigue and learning effects, resulting in avoidance strategies concerning follow-up questions for respondents as well as for interviewers. Furthermore, we included extensive interviewer controls. Results: Results suggest that distortions in the German GGS are related to interviewers and interviewees. We found indicators of learning effects of respondents, which lead to a shortening of interviews and to more biased survey responses to screening questions in later sections of the survey. We also found strong hints that interviewers learned how to shorten interviews. Conclusions: The analysis provides insights into the distortions of the retrospective parts of the German GGS and their causes. On the one hand, researchers may use this information to decide how to deal with the German GGS and especially the information on cohorts 1955 and older. On the other hand, our findings lead to several suggestions concerning the survey design and implementation of future large-scale demographic surveys.

Suggested Citation

  • Kerstin Ruckdeschel & Lenore Sauer & Robert Naderi, 2016. "Reliability of retrospective event histories within the German Generations and Gender Survey," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 34(11), pages 321-358.
    • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:34:y:2016:i:11
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2016.34.11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol34/11/34-11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2016.34.11?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jörg-Peter Schräpler, 2001. "Respondent Behavior in Panel Studies: A Case Study of the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP)," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 244, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Jürgen Dorbritz, 2008. "Germany: Family diversity with low actual and desired fertility," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(17), pages 557-598.
    3. Frauke Kreuter & Susan McCulloch & Stanley Presser & Roger Tourangeau, 2011. "The Effects of Asking Filter Questions in Interleafed Versus Grouped Format," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(1), pages 88-104, February.
    4. Michaela R. Kreyenfeld & Kryštof Zeman & Marion Burkimsher & Ina Jaschinski, 2011. "Fertility data for German speaking countries. What is the potential? Where are the pitfalls?," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2011-003, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    5. Theo Van Tilburg, 1998. "Interviewer Effects in the Measurement of Personal Network Size," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 26(3), pages 300-328, February.
    6. Scott J. Savage & Donald M. Waldman, 2008. "Learning and fatigue during choice experiments: a comparison of online and mail survey modes," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 351-371.
    7. Michaela R. Kreyenfeld & Anne Hornung & Karolin Kubisch & Ina Jaschinski, 2010. "Fertility and union histories from German GGS data: some critical reflections," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2010-023, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    8. Bredl, Sebastian & Storfinger, Nina & Menold, Natalja, 2011. "A literature review of methods to detect fabricated survey data," Discussion Papers 56, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Center for international Development and Environmental Research (ZEU).
    9. Jorik Vergauwen & David De Wachter & Jonas Wood & Karel Neels, 2015. "Quality of demographic data in GGS Wave 1," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 32(24), pages 723-774.
    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. Eugenio Paglino & Tom Emery, 2020. "Evaluating interviewer manipulation in the new round of the Generations and Gender Survey," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 43(50), pages 1461-1494.

    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. Kosyakova, Yuliya & Olbrich, Lukas & Sakshaug, Joseph & Schwanhäuser, Silvia, 2019. "Identification of interviewer falsification in the IAB-BAMF-SOEP Survey of Refugees in Germany," FDZ Methodenreport 201902_en, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    2. Eugenio Paglino & Tom Emery, 2020. "Evaluating interviewer manipulation in the new round of the Generations and Gender Survey," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 43(50), pages 1461-1494.
    3. Judith C. Koops & Aart C. Liefbroer & Anne H. Gauthier, 2017. "The Influence of Parental Educational Attainment on the Partnership Context at First Birth in 16 Western Societies," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 33(4), pages 533-557, October.
    4. Jorik Vergauwen & David De Wachter & Jonas Wood & Karel Neels, 2015. "Quality of demographic data in GGS Wave 1," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 32(24), pages 723-774.
    5. Jonas Wood & Tine Kil & Karel Neels, 2014. "The educational gradient of childlessness and cohort parity progression in 14 low fertility countries," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 31(46), pages 1365-1416.
    6. Jenny Gierveld & Pearl A. Dykstra & Niels Schenk, 2012. "Living arrangements, intergenerational support types and older adult loneliness in Eastern and Western Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 27(7), pages 167-200.
    7. Martin Klesment & Leen Rahnu & Luule Sakkeus & Allan Puur, 2014. "Varying association between education and second births in Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 31(27), pages 813-860.
    8. Talip Kilic & Thomas Pave Sohnesen, 2019. "Same Question But Different Answer: Experimental Evidence on Questionnaire Design's Impact on Poverty Measured by Proxies," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(1), pages 144-165, March.
    9. DeLong, Karen L. & Syrengelas, Konstantinos G. & Grebitus, Carola & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2021. "Visual versus Text Attribute Representation in Choice Experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    10. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Michaela Kreyenfeld & Wendy Sigle-Rushton & Renske Keizer & Trude Lappegård & Aiva Jasilioniene & Caroline Berghammer & Paola Di Giulio, 2012. "Changes in union status during the transition to parenthood in eleven European countries, 1970s to early 2000s," Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 66(2), pages 167-182, July.
    11. Suzana Karim & Benjamin M. Craig & Stephen Poteet, 2021. "Does Controlling for Scale Heterogeneity Better Explain Respondents’ Preference Segmentation in Discrete Choice Experiments? A Case Study of US Health Insurance Demand," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(5), pages 573-583, July.
    12. Allan Puur & Luule Sakkeus & Asta Põldma & Anne Herm, 2011. "Intergenerational family constellations in contemporary Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 25(4), pages 135-172.
    13. Liu, Ruifeng & ,, 2021. "What We Can Learn from the Interactions of Food Traceable Attributes? a Case Study of Fuji Apple in China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315916, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Stichnoth, Holger & Yeter, Mustafa, 2013. "Cultural influences on the fertility behaviour of first- and second-generation immigrants in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-023, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. Isabella Buber-Ennser, 2014. "Attrition in the Austrian Generations and Gender Survey," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 31(16), pages 459-496.
    16. Merritt, Meagan G. & Delong, Karen Lewis & Griffith, Andrew P. & Jensen, Kimberly L., 2018. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Tennessee Certified Beef," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 233-254, May.
    17. Printezis, Iryna & Grebitus, Carola, 2018. "Marketing Channels for Local Food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 161-171.
    18. Chenyi He & Lijia Shi & Zhifeng Gao & Lisa House, 2020. "The impact of customer ratings on consumer choice of fresh produce: A stated preference experiment approach," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 359-373, September.
    19. Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2010. "Preferences for site and environmental functions when selecting forthcoming national parks," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1532-1544, May.
    20. Ian Brunton-Smith & Patrick Sturgis & George Leckie, 2017. "Detecting and understanding interviewer effects on survey data by using a cross-classified mixed effects location–scale model," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 551-568, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - 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:dem:demres:v:34:y:2016:i:11. 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: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    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.