IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v98y2014icp97-114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the advantages and disadvantages of subjective measures

Author

Listed:
  • Jahedi, Salar
  • Méndez, Fabio

Abstract

This paper utilizes data from a laboratory experiment in order to examine the advantages and disadvantages of subjective measures. Our results indicate good and bad news: subjective measures correlate highly with the variables they are designed to capture but they also systematically suffer from many economic and cognitive biases. Importantly, we find that subjective measures are often complements to objective measures, and that they may actually be preferable in use to objective measures in those cases where the two disagree with each another.

Suggested Citation

  • Jahedi, Salar & Méndez, Fabio, 2014. "On the advantages and disadvantages of subjective measures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 97-114.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:98:y:2014:i:c:p:97-114
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2013.12.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268113003144
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2013.12.016?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barr, Abigail & Serra, Danila, 2010. "Corruption and culture: An experimental analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 862-869, December.
    2. James E. Foster & Andrew W. Horowitz & Fabio Méndez, 2012. "An Axiomatic Approach to the Measurement of Corruption: Theory and Applications," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 26(2), pages 217-235.
    3. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    4. Seligson, Mitchell A., 2006. "The Measurement and Impact of Corruption Victimization: Survey Evidence from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 381-404, February.
    5. Olken, Benjamin A., 2009. "Corruption perceptions vs. corruption reality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(7-8), pages 950-964, August.
    6. Jeff Dominitz & Charles F. Manski, 2004. "How Should We Measure Consumer Confidence?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 51-66, Spring.
    7. Sendhil Mullainathan & Marianne Bertrand, 2001. "Do People Mean What They Say? Implications for Subjective Survey Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 67-72, May.
    8. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4352 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Razafindrakoto, Mireille & Roubaud, François, 2010. "Are International Databases on Corruption Reliable? A Comparison of Expert Opinion Surveys and Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1057-1069, August.
    10. Charles F. Manski, 2004. "Measuring Expectations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(5), pages 1329-1376, September.
    11. Dilyan Donchev & Gergely Ujhelyi, 2014. "What Do Corruption Indices Measure?," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 309-331, July.
    12. Daniel Kahneman & Alan B. Krueger, 2006. "Developments in the Measurement of Subjective Well-Being," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    13. Oswald, Andrew J. & Wu, Stephen, 2010. "Objective Confirmation of Subjective Measures of Human Well-being: Evidence from the USA," IZA Discussion Papers 4695, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Kaplan, David S. & Pathania, Vikram, 2010. "What influences firms' perceptions?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 419-431, December.
    15. Reinikka, Ritva & Svensson, Jakob, 2006. "Using Micro-Surveys to Measure and Explain Corruption," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 359-370, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gutmann, Jerg & Padovano, Fabio & Voigt, Stefan, 2020. "Perception vs. experience: Explaining differences in corruption measures using microdata," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    2. Razafindrakoto, Mireille & Roubaud, François, 2010. "Are International Databases on Corruption Reliable? A Comparison of Expert Opinion Surveys and Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1057-1069, August.
    3. Krisztina Kis-Katos & Günther G. Schulze, 2013. "Corruption in Southeast Asia: a survey of recent research," Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, The Crawford School, The Australian National University, vol. 27(1), pages 79-109, May.
    4. Günther G. Schulze & Bambang Suharnoko Sjahrir & Nikita Zakharov, 2016. "Corruption in Russia," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(1), pages 135-171.
    5. Caroline T. Witte & Martijn J. Burger & Elena Ianchovichina, 2020. "Subjective Well‐Being and Peaceful Uprisings," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 120-158, February.
    6. Laarni Escresa & Lucio Picci, 2017. "A New Cross-National Measure of Corruption," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 31(1), pages 196-219.
    7. Carmelo León & Jorge Araña & Javier León, 2013. "Correcting for Scale Perception Bias in Measuring Corruption: an Application to Chile and Spain," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(3), pages 977-995, December.
    8. Hu, Juncheng, 2021. "Do facilitation payments affect earnings management? Evidence from China," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    9. Yan Leung Cheung & P. Raghavendra Rau & Aris Stouraitis, 2012. "How much do firms pay as bribes and what benefits do they get? Evidence from corruption cases worldwide," NBER Working Papers 17981, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Guy Elaad & Alex Krumer & Jeffrey Kantor, 2018. "Corruption and Sensitive Soccer Games: Cross-Country Evidence," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 364-394.
    11. Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "Self-reported & revealed trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    12. Robert Gillanders & Sinikka Parviainen, 2018. "Corruption and the shadow economy at the regional level," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 1729-1743, November.
    13. Rajeev K. Goel & Michael A. Nelson, 2021. "Corrupt encounters of the fairer sex: female entrepreneurs and their corruption perceptions/experience," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1973-1994, December.
    14. Sabina Alkire & Emma Samman, 2014. "Mobilising the Household Data Required to Progress toward the SDGs," OPHI Working Papers 72, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    15. Giorgio d’Agostino & Luca Pieroni, 2019. "Modelling Corruption Perceptions: Evidence from Eastern Europe and Central Asian Countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 311-341, February.
    16. Laarni Escresa & Lucio Picci, 2020. "The determinants of cross-border corruption," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 351-378, September.
    17. Yan-Leung Cheung & P. Raghavendra Rau & Aris Stouraitis, 2021. "What Determines the Return to Bribery? Evidence from Corruption Cases Worldwide," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6235-6265, October.
    18. Roberto Dell’Anno, 2020. "Corruption around the world: an analysis by partial least squares—structural equation modeling," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 327-350, September.
    19. Qu, Guangjun & Slagter, Bob & Sylwester, Kevin & Doiron, Kyle, 2019. "Explaining the standard errors of corruption perception indices," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 907-920.
    20. Ivlevs Artjoms & Hinks Timothy, 2015. "Bribing Behaviour and Sample Selection: Evidence from Post-Socialist Countries and Western Europe," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 235(2), pages 139-167, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Subjective measures; Perceptions; Corruption; Happiness; Biases; Experiments;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles

    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:eee:jeborg:v:98:y:2014:i:c:p:97-114. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jebo .

    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.