IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Approaches for event history analysis based on complex longitudinal survey data


  • Marjo Pyy-Martikainen



A researcher using complex longitudinal survey data for event history analysis has to make several choices that affect the analysis results. These choices include the following: whether a design-based or a model-based approach for the analysis is taken, which subset of data to use and, if a design-based approach is chosen, which weights to use. We discuss different choices and illustrate their effects using longitudinal register data linked at person-level with the Finnish subset of the European Community Household Panel data. The use of register data enables us to construct an event history data set without nonresponse and attrition. Design-based estimates from these data are used as benchmarks against design-based and model-based estimates from subsets of data usually available for a survey data analyst. Our illustration suggests that the often recommended way to use panel data for longitudinal analyses, data from total respondents and weights from the last wave analysed may not be the best way to go. Instead, using all available data and weights from the first survey wave appears to be a safe choice for longitudinal analyses based on multipurpose survey data. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Marjo Pyy-Martikainen, 2013. "Approaches for event history analysis based on complex longitudinal survey data," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 97(3), pages 297-315, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:alstar:v:97:y:2013:i:3:p:297-315
    DOI: 10.1007/s10182-012-0205-6

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Meyer, Bruce D, 1990. "Unemployment Insurance and Unemployment Spells," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 757-782, July.
    2. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    3. Franco Peracchi, 2002. "The European Community Household Panel: A review," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 63-90.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    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:spr:alstar:v:97:y:2013:i:3:p:297-315. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.