IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v50y2021i4p1552-1583.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimental Evidence on Immediate and Long-term Consequences of Test-induced Respondent Burden for Panel Attrition

Author

Listed:
  • Corinna Kleinert
  • Bernhard Christoph
  • Michael Ruland

Abstract

Panel attrition is a major problem in long-term panel studies. While the design of the German National Educational Panel Study adult survey—combining biannual competency tests with regular face-to-face interviews—is highly innovative, such a design could raise respondent burden and thus potentially increase panel attrition and nonresponse bias. To test this possibility, we use an experimental split questionnaire design administering two tests to one half of the respondents but only one test to the other half. Analyzing the effects of these different experimental settings on response behavior shows that even though those assigned to the longer test variant had no higher probability of refusing to participate in the survey, they were significantly more likely to apply alternative strategies for not taking the tests. The results also show that not only test avoidance but also low test performance has negative consequences for survey participation in later waves.

Suggested Citation

  • Corinna Kleinert & Bernhard Christoph & Michael Ruland, 2021. "Experimental Evidence on Immediate and Long-term Consequences of Test-induced Respondent Burden for Panel Attrition," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 50(4), pages 1552-1583, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:50:y:2021:i:4:p:1552-1583
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124119826145
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124119826145
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124119826145?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. 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.
    2. Nicoletti, Cheti & Buck, Nick, 2004. "Explaining interviewee contact and co-operation in the British and German Household Panels," ISER Working Paper Series 2004-06, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    3. Lee A. Lillard & Constantijn W. A. Panis, 1998. "Panel Attrition from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics: Household Income, Marital Status, and Mortality," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 437-457.
    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. Kevin Foster & Claire Greene & Joanna Stavins, 2022. "2021 Survey and Diary of Consumer Payment Choice," Consumer Payments Research Data Reports 2022-02, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    2. Yan Ting & Williams Douglas, 2022. "Response Burden – Review and Conceptual Framework," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 38(4), pages 939-961, December.

    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. Dmytro Hryshko, 2012. "Labor income profiles are not heterogeneous: Evidence from income growth rates," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 3(2), pages 177-209, July.
    3. Kapteyn, Arie & Michaud, Pierre-Carl & Smith, James P. & van Soest, Arthur, 2006. "Effects of Attrition and Non-Response in the Health and Retirement Study," IZA Discussion Papers 2246, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. 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).
    5. Emmanouil Mentzakis & Paul McNamee & Mandy Ryan, 2009. "Who cares and how much: exploring the determinants of co-residential informal care," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 283-303, September.
    6. Paul Contoyannis & Andrew M. Jones & Nigel Rice, 2004. "The dynamics of health in the British Household Panel Survey," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 473-503.
    7. Behr Andreas, 2006. "Comparing Estimation Strategies for Income Equations in the Presence of Panel Attrition: Empirical Results Based on the ECHP," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 226(4), pages 361-384, August.
    8. Juergen Jung, 2022. "Estimating transition probabilities between health states using US longitudinal survey data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 901-943, August.
    9. Rupert, Peter & Zanella, Giulio, 2015. "Revisiting wage, earnings, and hours profiles," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 114-130.
    10. Smith, James Patrick & Smith, Gillian C., 2010. "Long-term economic costs of psychological problems during childhood," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 110-115, July.
    11. Steve Laufer & Ahu Gemici, 2009. "Marriage and Cohabitation," 2009 Meeting Papers 1191, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    12. 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.
    13. Michael Fertig & Stefanie Schurer, 2007. "Labour Market Outcomes of Immigrants in Germany – The Importance of Heterogeneity and Attrition Bias," Ruhr Economic Papers 0020, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    14. 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.
    15. Arslan, Aslihan & Taylor, J. Edward, 2011. "Whole-household migration, inequality and poverty in rural Mexico," Kiel Working Papers 1742, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    16. Andrew M. Jones & Xander Koolman & Nigel Rice, 2006. "Health‐related non‐response in the British Household Panel Survey and European Community Household Panel: using inverse‐probability‐weighted estimators in non‐linear models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 543-569, July.
    17. Fertig, Michael & Schurer, Stefanie, 2007. "Labour Market Outcomes of Immigrants in Germany – The Importance of Heterogeneity and Attrition Bias," Ruhr Economic Papers 20, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    18. Denise Hawkes & Ian Plewis, 2006. "Modelling non‐response in the National Child Development Study," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 479-491, July.
    19. Giulio Zanella & Peter Rupert, 2010. "Revisiting Wage, Earnings, and Hours Profiles," 2010 Meeting Papers 1158, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    20. Sadig, Husam, 2014. "Non-response subgroup-tailored weighting: the choice of variables and the set of respondents used to estimate the weighting model," ISER Working Paper Series 2014-36, Institute for Social and Economic Research.

    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:sae:somere:v:50:y:2021:i:4:p:1552-1583. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.