IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2608.23508.html

Testing selection on observables in parametric models with refreshment samples

Author

Listed:
  • Grigory Franguridi
  • Arie Kapteyn

Abstract

In panels with sample selection (that may occur due to attrition, nonresponse, etc.), the assumption of selection on observables (missing at random, MAR) is commonly imposed despite often being implausible. However, this assumption becomes testable when a refreshment sample is available. We develop a statistical test of MAR based on a distance between two estimated distributions: one obtained using the standard inverse probability weighting (IPW) that is valid under MAR and the other obtained using an alternative weighting that is valid under a weaker assumption of additive nonignorability of Hirano et al. (2001). This test implicitly compares the distribution of the IPW-weighted sample in the attrition period with the distribution of the refreshment sample, which coincide if the MAR assumption holds. We establish that, when the input distributions are parametric, our test statistic converges to the generalized chi-squared distribution under the null of MAR. This limit distribution can be estimated using the recursive formulas derived by Franguridi et al. (2026). We illustrate the performance of our test in Monte Carlo simulations. Finally, we apply our test to an empirical example using a subsample of the Understanding America Study (UAS) dataset.

Suggested Citation

  • Grigory Franguridi & Arie Kapteyn, 2026. "Testing selection on observables in parametric models with refreshment samples," Papers 2608.23508, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2608.23508
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2608.23508
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1979. "Attrition Bias in Experimental and Panel Data: The Gary Income Maintenance Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 455-473, March.
    2. Vaart,A. W. van der, 2000. "Asymptotic Statistics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521784504, June.
    3. Ridder, Geert, 1992. "An empirical evaluation of some models for non-random attrition in panel data," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 337-355, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Terence C. Cheng & Pravin K. Trivedi, 2015. "Attrition Bias in Panel Data: A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing? A Case Study Based on the Mabel Survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1101-1117, September.
    2. Shin, Jaeun & Moon, Sangho, 2006. "Fertility, relative wages, and labor market decisions: A case of female teachers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 591-604, December.
    3. Grigory Franguridi & Jinyong Hahn & Pierre Hoonhout & Arie Kapteyn & Geert Ridder, 2025. "Raking for estimation and inference in panel models with nonignorable attrition and refreshment," Papers 2512.13270, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2026.
    4. Harding, Matthew & Lamarche, Carlos, 2019. "A panel quantile approach to attrition bias in Big Data: Evidence from a randomized experiment," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 61-82.
    5. Yamana Kazufumi, 2020. "Monte Carlo Evidence on the Estimation Method for Industry Dynamics," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, January.
    6. Juergen Jung, 2022. "Estimating transition probabilities between health states using US longitudinal survey data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 901-943, August.
    7. 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.
    8. Emre Ekinci & Insan Tunah & Berk Yavuzoglu, 2017. "Rescaled Additivity Non-Ignorable (RAN) Model of Generalized Attrition," Working Papers 1702, Nazarbayev University, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2017.
    9. Sasaki, Yuya, 2015. "Heterogeneity and selection in dynamic panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 236-249.
    10. Richard Dorsett, 2004. "Using matched substitutes to adjust for nonignorable nonresponse: an empirical investigation using labour market data," PSI Research Discussion Series 16, Policy Studies Institute, UK.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Judith K. Hellerstein & Guido W. Imbens, 1999. "Imposing Moment Restrictions From Auxiliary Data By Weighting," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(1), pages 1-14, February.
    14. Randolph Luca Bruno & Laura Magazzini & Marco Stampini, 2018. "The Joint Estimate of Singleton and Longitudinal Observations: a GMM Approach for Improved Efficiency," Working Papers 04/2018, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    15. Nevo, Aviv, 2003. "Using Weights to Adjust for Sample Selection When Auxiliary Information Is Available," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 21(1), pages 43-52, January.
    16. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder & Donald B. Rubin, 2001. "Combining Panel Data Sets with Attrition and Refreshment Samples," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1645-1659, November.
    17. Emre Ekinci, 2009. "Dealing with Attrition When Refreshment Samples are Available: An Application to the Turkish Household Labor Force Survey," 2009 Meeting Papers 353, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    18. Bhattacharya, Debopam, 2008. "Inference in panel data models under attrition caused by unobservables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 430-446, June.
    19. Heng Chen & Marie-Hélène Felt & Kim P. Huynh, 2017. "Retail payment innovations and cash usage: accounting for attrition by using refreshment samples," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 503-530, February.
    20. Walter Beckert, 2015. "Choice in the Presence of Experts," Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics and Finance 1503, Birkbeck, Department of Economics, Mathematics & Statistics.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2608.23508. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.