IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

I feel good! Gender differences and reporting heterogeneity in self-assessed health

  • Udo Schneider

    ()

  • Christian Pfarr
  • Brit Schneider
  • Volker Ulrich

For empirical analysis and policy-oriented recommendation, the precise measurement of individual health or well-being is essential. The problem with variables based on questionnaires such as self-assessed health is that the answer may depend on individual reporting behaviour. Moreover, if individual‟s health perception varies with certain attitudes of the respondent reporting heterogenei-ty may lead to index or cut-point shifts of the health distribution, causing estimation problems. We analyse the reporting behaviour of individuals on their self-assessed health status, a five-point categorical variable. We explore observed heterogeneity in categorical variables and include unob-served individual heterogeneity using German panel data. Estimation results show different im-pacts of socioeconomic and health related variables on the five subscales of self-assessed health. Moreover, the answering behaviour varies between female and male respondents, pointing to gen-der specific perception and assessment of diseases. Reporting behaviour on self-assessed health questions in surveys is problematic due to a possible heterogeneity. Hence, in case of reporting heterogeneity, using self-assessed measures in empirical studies may be misleading or at least ambiguous.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10198-011-0301-7
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Springer in its journal The European Journal of Health Economics.

Volume (Year): 13 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 (June)
Pages: 251-265

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:13:y:2012:i:3:p:251-265
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/10198/index.htm

Order Information: Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521194204 is not listed on IDEAS
  2. Christian Pfarr & Andreas Schmid & Udo Schneider, 2011. "Estimating ordered categorical variables using panel data: a generalized ordered probit model with an autofit procedure," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 54(1), pages 7-23.
  3. Doorslaer, Eddy van & Jones, Andrew M., 2003. "Inequalities in self-reported health: validation of a new approach to measurement," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 61-87, January.
  4. Maarten Lindeboom & Marcel Kerkhofs, 2009. "Health and work of the elderly: subjective health measures, reporting errors and endogeneity in the relationship between health and work," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(6), pages 1024-1046.
  5. Teresa Bago d’Uva & Eddy Van Doorslaer & Maarten Lindeboom & Owen O’Donnell & Somnath Chatterji, 2006. "Does reporting heterogeneity bias the measurement of health disparities?," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 06/03, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
  6. Stefan Boes & Rainer Winkelmann, 2006. "Ordered response models," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 167-181, March.
  7. Marcel Kerkhofs & Maarten Lindeboom, 2000. "Health and Work of the Elderly: Subjective Health Measures, Reporting Errors and the Endogenous Relationship Between Health and Work," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0653, Econometric Society.
  8. Fabrice Etilé & Carine Milcent, 2006. "Income-related reporting heterogeneity in self-assessed health: evidence from France," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(9), pages 965-981.
  9. Michael Baker & Mark Stabile & Catherine Deri, 2001. "What do Self-Reported, Objective, Measures of Health Measure?," NBER Working Papers 8419, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Butler, J S, et al, 1987. "Measurement Error in Self-reported Health Variables," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(4), pages 644-50, November.
  11. Cristina Hernandez-Quevedo & Andrew M Jones & Nigel Rice, . "Reporting Bias and Heterogeneity in Self-Assessed Health. Evidence from the British Household Panel Survey," Discussion Papers 04/18, Department of Economics, University of York.
  12. Nicolas R. Ziebarth, 2009. "Measurement of Health, the Sensitivity of the Concentration Index, and Reporting Heterogeneity," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 211, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
  13. Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Johannesson, Magnus, 1999. "New estimates of the demand for health: results based on a categorical health measure and Swedish micro data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(10), pages 1325-1332, November.
  14. Richard Disney & Carl Emmerson & Matthew Wakefield, 2003. "Ill health and retirement in Britain: a panel data based analysis," IFS Working Papers W03/02, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  15. John Bound, 1991. "Self-Reported Versus Objective Measures of Health in Retirement Models," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 26(1), pages 106-138.
  16. Lindeboom, Maarten & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2004. "Cut-Point Shift and Index Shift in Self-Reported Health," IZA Discussion Papers 1286, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  17. Richard Williams, 2006. "Generalized ordered logit/partial proportional odds models for ordinal dependent variables," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 6(1), pages 58-82, March.
  18. repec:dgr:uvatin:20060033 is not listed on IDEAS
  19. Kenkel, D.S., 1989. "Should You Eat Breakfast? Estimates From Health Production Functions," Papers 9-90-8, Pennsylvania State - Department of Economics.
  20. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521142373 is not listed on IDEAS
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:13:y:2012:i:3:p:251-265. 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: (Guenther Eichhorn)

or (Christopher F Baum)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.