IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlabec/doi10.1086-712922.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Practical Proactive Proposal for Dealing with Attrition: Alternative Approaches and an Empirical Example

Author

Listed:
  • John DiNardo
  • Jordan Matsudaira
  • Justin McCrary
  • Lisa Sanbonmatsu

Abstract

Survey nonresponse and attrition undermine the validity of many and possibly most econometric estimates. We propose that survey administrators and evaluators proactively create an instrument for observation, for example, by ex ante randomizing participants to differing intensity of follow-up. We illustrate how to apply our proposed methodology using a carefully conducted randomized controlled trial, the Moving to Opportunity demonstration project, which de facto randomly assigned a subset of subjects to more intensive follow-up. The approach yields treatment effect estimates similar to the unbiased estimator based on complete administrative data and has narrower confidence intervals than alternative bounding approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • John DiNardo & Jordan Matsudaira & Justin McCrary & Lisa Sanbonmatsu, 2021. "A Practical Proactive Proposal for Dealing with Attrition: Alternative Approaches and an Empirical Example," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(S2), pages 507-541.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlabec:doi:10.1086/712922
    DOI: 10.1086/712922
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/712922
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/712922
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/712922?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.

    More about this item

    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:ucp:jlabec:doi:10.1086/712922. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JOLE .

    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.