IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/demogr/v49y2012i4p1499-1519.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Studies: Evidence From Labor Force Items in the Current Population Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Halpern-Manners
  • John Warren

Abstract

Does participating in a longitudinal survey affect respondents’ answers to subsequent questions about their labor force characteristics? In this article, we investigate the magnitude of panel conditioning or time-in-survey biases for key labor force questions in the monthly Current Population Survey (CPS). Using linked CPS records for household heads first interviewed between January 2007 and June 2010, our analyses are based on strategic within-person comparisons across survey months and between-person comparisons across CPS rotation groups. We find considerable evidence for panel conditioning effects in the CPS. Panel conditioning downwardly biases the CPS-based unemployment rate, mainly by leading people to remove themselves from its denominator. Across surveys, CPS respondents (claim to) leave the labor force in greater numbers than otherwise equivalent respondents who are participating in the CPS for the first time. The results cannot be attributed to panel attrition or mode effects. We discuss implications for CPS-based research and policy as well as for survey methodology more broadly. Copyright Population Association of America 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Halpern-Manners & John Warren, 2012. "Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Studies: Evidence From Labor Force Items in the Current Population Survey," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 49(4), pages 1499-1519, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:demogr:v:49:y:2012:i:4:p:1499-1519
    DOI: 10.1007/s13524-012-0124-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s13524-012-0124-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13524-012-0124-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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Das, J.W.M. & Toepoel, V. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2007. "Can I use a Panel? Panel Conditioning and Attrition Bias in Panel Surveys," Other publications TiSEM 9407cc7a-23f1-49b9-990d-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. repec:mpr:mprres:6479 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Sharad Borle & Utpal M. Dholakia & Siddharth S. Singh & Robert A. Westbrook, 2007. "The Impact of Survey Participation on Subsequent Customer Behavior: An Empirical Investigation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 711-726, 09-10.
    4. Das, J.W.M. & van Soest, A.H.O. & Toepoel, V., 2011. "Nonparametric tests of panel conditioning and attrition bias in panel surveys," Other publications TiSEM 76b0a827-e4b6-403d-8465-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Meurs, Henk & Van Wissen, Leo & Visser, Jacqueline, 1989. "Measurement Biases in Panel Data," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt00q1x266, University of California Transportation Center.
    6. Granberg, Donald & Holmberg, Sören, 1992. "The Hawthorne Effect in Election Studies: The Impact of Survey Participation on Voting," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 240-247, April.
    7. Solon, Gary, 1986. "Effects of Rotation Group Bias on Estimation of Unemployment," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 4(1), pages 105-109, January.
    8. John L. Czajka with other members of the Panel on the U.S. Census Bureau's Reengineered Survey of Income Program Participation. Constance F. Citro John Karl Scholz & Editors. Committee on National Sta, "undated". "Reengineering the Survey of Income and Program Participation," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 92ffe3e10fec4587859f12cb5, Mathematica Policy Research.
    9. Simmons, Carolyn J & Bickart, Barbara A & Lynch, John G, Jr, 1993. "Capturing and Creating Public Opinion in Survey Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 316-329, September.
    10. Dholakia, Utpal M & Morwitz, Vicki G, 2002. "The Scope and Persistence of Mere-Measurement Effects: Evidence from a Field Study of Customer Satisfaction Measurement," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(2), pages 159-167, September.
    11. Vicki G. Morwitz, 2005. "The effect of survey measurement on respondent behaviour," Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(4‐5), pages 451-455, July.
    12. Meurs, Henk & Van Wissen, Leo & Visser, Jacqueline, 1989. "Measurement Biases in Panel Data," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt4095q216, University of California Transportation Center.
    13. Marcel Das & Vera Toepoel & Arthur van Soest, 2011. "Nonparametric Tests of Panel Conditioning and Attrition Bias in Panel Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(1), pages 32-56, February.
    14. Bartels, Larry M., 1999. "Panel Effects in the American National Election Studies," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 1-20, January.
    15. Gavan J. Fitzsimons & Joseph C. Nunes & Patti Williams, 2007. "License to Sin: The Liberating Role of Reporting Expectations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(1), pages 22-31, April.
    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. Ward, Jason M. & Anne Edwards, Kathryn, 2021. "CPS Nonresponse During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Explanations, Extent, and Effects," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    2. Chadi, Adrian, 2021. "Identification of attrition bias using different types of panel refreshments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    3. Beatty, Timothy K.M. & Ritter, Joseph A., 2018. "Measuring the Health Cost of Prolonged Unemployment: Evidence from the Great Recession," Miscellaneous Publications 280435, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    4. Jed Friedman & Kathleen Beegle & Joachim De Weerdt & John Gibson, 2016. "Decomposing response error in food consumption measurement: implications for survey design from a survey experiment in Tanzania," Working Papers of LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance 537166, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance.
    5. Hie Joo Ahn & James Hamilton, 2022. "Measuring Labor-Force Participation and the Incidence and Duration of Unemployment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 44, pages 1-32, April.
    6. Ryan D. Edwards, 2018. "If My Blood Pressure Is High, Do I Take It to Heart? Behavioral Effects of Biomarker Collection in the Health and Retirement Study," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(2), pages 403-434, April.
    7. Beatty, Timothy K.M. & Ritter, Joseph A., 2018. "Measuring the Health Cost of Prolonged Unemployment: Evidence from the Great Recession," Staff Papers 280435, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    8. repec:lic:licosd:37516 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Hie Joo Ahn & James Hamilton, 2022. "Measuring Labor-Force Participation and the Incidence and Duration of Unemployment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 44, pages 1-32, April.
    10. Bernhardt, Robert & Munro, David & Wolcott, Erin, 2021. "How Does the Dramatic Rise of CPS Non-Response Impact Labor Market Indicators?," GLO Discussion Paper Series 781, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    11. Bach, Ruben L. & Eckman, Stephanie, 2020. "Rotation group bias in reporting of household purchases in the U.S. Consumer Expenditure Survey," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    12. Hannah Schwarz & Melanie Revilla & Bella Struminskaya, 2022. "Do previous survey experience and participating due to an incentive affect response quality? Evidence from the CRONOS panel," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(3), pages 981-1003, July.
    13. Georgarakos, Dimitris & Kenny, Geoff, 2022. "Household spending and fiscal support during the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights from a new consumer survey," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(S), pages 1-14.
    14. Friedman, Jed & Beegle, Kathleen & De Weerdt, Joachim & Gibson, John, 2017. "Decomposing response error in food consumption measurement: Implications for survey design from a randomized survey experiment in Tanzania," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 94-111.
    15. Bach, Ruben L. & Eckman, Stephanie, 2017. "Does participating in a panel survey change respondents' labor market behavior?," IAB-Discussion Paper 201715, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    16. Bailey, Keith A. & Spletzer, James R., 2021. "A new measure of multiple jobholding in the U.S. economy," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    17. Ryan D. Edwards, 2013. "If My Blood Pressure Is High, Do I Take It To Heart? Behavioral Impacts of Biomarker Collection in the Health and Retirement Study," NBER Working Papers 19311, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Robert Bernhardt & David Munro & Erin L. Wolcott, 2024. "How does the dramatic rise of nonresponse in the Current Population Survey impact labor market indicators?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(3), pages 498-512, April.

    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. John Robert Warren & Andrew Halpern-Manners, 2012. "Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Social Science Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(4), pages 491-534, November.
    2. Bach, Ruben L. & Eckman, Stephanie, 2017. "Does participating in a panel survey change respondents' labor market behavior?," IAB-Discussion Paper 201715, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    3. Toepoel, V. & Das, J.W.M. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2008. "Design Effects in Web Surveys : Comparing Trained and Fresh Respondents," Other publications TiSEM 4c8b40aa-7557-4844-9474-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Toepoel, V. & Das, J.W.M. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2008. "Design Effects in Web Surveys : Comparing Trained and Fresh Respondents," Other publications TiSEM 4c8b40aa-7557-4844-9474-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Rene Segers & Philip Hans Franses, 2014. "Panel design effects on response rates and response quality," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 68(1), pages 1-24, February.
    6. Marcel Das & Vera Toepoel & Arthur van Soest, 2011. "Nonparametric Tests of Panel Conditioning and Attrition Bias in Panel Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(1), pages 32-56, February.
    7. Das, J.W.M. & Toepoel, V. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2007. "Can I use a Panel? Panel Conditioning and Attrition Bias in Panel Surveys," Other publications TiSEM 9407cc7a-23f1-49b9-990d-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Das, J.W.M. & Toepoel, V. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2007. "Can I use a Panel? Panel Conditioning and Attrition Bias in Panel Surveys," Other publications TiSEM 9407cc7a-23f1-49b9-990d-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. 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.
    10. Nardo Vries & Werner Liebregts & André Stel, 2020. "Explaining entrepreneurial performance of solo self-employed from a motivational perspective," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 447-460, August.
    11. Stephan, Gesine & Hetschko, Clemens & Schmidtke, Julia & Eid, Michael & Lawes, Mario, 2024. "Feeling Observed? A Field Experiment on the Effects of Intense Survey Participation on Job Seekers' Labour Market Outcomes," IZA Discussion Papers 17347, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Lola Hernandez & Robbert-Jan 't Hoen & Juanita Raat, 2017. "Survey shortcuts? Evidence from a payment diary survey," DNB Working Papers 546, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
    13. Sarah Brown & Mark N. Harris & Christopher Spencer & Karl Taylor, 2024. "Financial Expectations and Household Consumption: Does Middle‐Inflation Matter?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 56(4), pages 741-768, June.
    14. Golob, Thomas F., 1990. "The Dynamics of Household Travel Time Expenditures and Car Ownership Decisions," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2t18b4q9, University of California Transportation Center.
    15. Schwandt, Hannes, 2016. "Unmet aspirations as an explanation for the age U-shape in wellbeing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 75-87.
    16. Omar Merlo & Andreas B. Eisingerich & Wayne D. Hoyer, 2024. "Immunizing customers against negative brand-related information," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 140-163, January.
    17. Thomas F. Crossley & Jochem Bresser & Liam Delaney & Joachim Winter, 2017. "Can Survey Participation Alter Household Saving Behaviour?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(606), pages 2332-2357, November.
    18. Golob, Thomas F. & Golob, Jacqueline M., 1989. "Practical Consideration in the Development of a Transit Users Panel," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt56q060sc, University of California Transportation Center.
    19. Mine Kühn & Christian Dudel & Tobias C. Vogt & Anna Oksuzyan, 2017. "Trends in gender differences in health and mortality at working ages among West and East Germans," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2017-009, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    20. Khandker, Shahidur R. & Samad, Hussain A., 2014. "Dynamic effects of microcredit in Bangladesh," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6821, The World Bank.

    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:spr:demogr:v:49:y:2012:i:4:p:1499-1519. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.