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

Dissatisfied with Life or with Being Interviewed? Happiness and Motivation to Participate in a Survey

Author Info

  • Adrian Chadi

Abstract

Information on the number of interviewer contacts allows insights into how people's responses to questions on happiness are connected to the difficulty of reaching potential participants. Using the paradata of the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP), this paper continues such research by revealing a strong link between respondent motivation and reported happiness. Analyses of responses by future non-respondents substantiate this finding and shed light on a key question for empirical research on subjective well-being, which is whether the unhappy tend to avoid survey participation or whether the unwilling might respond more negatively when being asked about their satisfaction with life.

Download Info

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://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.440845.de/diw_sp0639.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) in its series SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research with number 639.

as
in new window

Length: 33 p.
Date of creation: 2014
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:diw:diwsop:diw_sp639
Contact details of provider: Postal: Mohrenstraße 58, D-10117 Berlin
Phone: xx49-30-89789-671
Fax: xx49-30-89789-109
Web page: http://www.diw.de/en/soep
Email:


More information through EDIRC

Keywords: Happiness; Respondent motivation; Measurement bias; Life satisfaction; Panel attrition; Interviewer contacts;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
  • C8 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs
  • I3 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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. Christoph Wunder & Andrea Wiencierz & Johannes Schwarze & Helmut Küchenhoff, 2013. "Well-Being over the Life Span: Semiparametric Evidence from British and German Longitudinal Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(1), pages 154-167, March.
  2. Robert Metcalfe & Nattavudh Powdthavee & Paul Dolan, 2011. "Destruction and Distress: Using a Quasi‐Experiment to Show the Effects of the September 11 Attacks on Mental Well‐Being in the United Kingdom," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(550), pages F81-F103, February.
  3. Cheti Nicoletti & Franco Peracchi & Francesca Foliano, 2009. "Estimating Income Poverty in the Presence of Missing Data and Measurement Error," CEIS Research Paper 145, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 30 Sep 2009.
  4. Adrian Chadi, 2013. "Third Person Effects in Interview Responses on Life Satisfaction," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201307, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).
  5. Ori Heffetz & Matthew Rabin, 2013. "Conclusions Regarding Cross-Group Differences in Happiness Depend on Difficulty of Reaching Respondents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 3001-21, December.
  6. Jeffrey E. Zabel, 1998. "An Analysis of Attrition in the Panel Study of Income Dynamics and the Survey of Income and Program Participation with an Application to a Model of Labor Market Behavior," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 479-506.
  7. Kristen Olson, 2013. "Do non-response follow-ups improve or reduce data quality?: a review of the existing literature," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(1), pages 129-145, 01.
  8. Semih Tumen & Tugba Zeydanli, 2013. "Day-of-the-Week Effects in Subjective Well-Being : Does Selectivity Matter?," Working Papers 1338, Research and Monetary Policy Department, Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey.
  9. Cheti Nicoletti & Franco Peracchi, 2005. "Survey response and survey characteristics: microlevel evidence from the European Community Household Panel," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 168(4), pages 763-781.
  10. Becketti, Sean, et al, 1988. "The Panel Study of Income Dynamics after Fourteen Years: An Evaluatio n," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(4), pages 472-92, October.
  11. Conchita D'Ambrosio & Joachim R. Frick, 2007. "Individual Well-Being in a Dynamic Perspective," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 5, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
  12. Kassenboehmer, Sonja C. & Haisken-DeNew, John P., 2012. "Heresy or enlightenment? The well-being age U-shape effect is flat," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 235-238.
  13. Wunder, Christoph & Heineck, Guido, 2012. "Working Time Preferences, Hours Mismatch and Well-Being of Couples: Are There Spillovers?," IZA Discussion Papers 6786, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  14. Mark Wooden & Nicole Watson, 2007. "The HILDA Survey and its Contribution to Economic and Social Research (So Far)," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 83(261), pages 208-231, 06.
  15. Frijters, Paul & Beatton, Tony, 2012. "The mystery of the U-shaped relationship between happiness and age," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 525-542.
  16. Martin Kroh, 2012. "Documentation of Sample Sizes and Panel Attrition in the German Socio Economic Panel (SOEP) (1984 until 2011)," Data Documentation 66, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  17. Uhrig, S.C. Noah, 2008. "The nature and causes of attrition in the British Household Panel Study," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-05, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
  18. Mark P. Taylor, 2006. "Tell me why I don't like Mondays: investigating day of the week effects on job satisfaction and psychological well-being," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(1), pages 127-142.
  19. Goebel, Jan & Krekel, Christian & Tiefenbach, Tim & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2013. "Natural Disaster, Policy Action, and Mental Well-Being: The Case of Fukushima," IZA Discussion Papers 7691, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  20. Pudney, Stephen, 2010. "Perception and retrospection: the dynamic consistency of responses to survey questions on wellbeing," ISER Working Paper Series 2010-07, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
  21. Denis Gerstorf & Nilam Ram & Guy Mayraz & Mira Hidajat & Ulman Lindenberger & Gert G. Wagner & Jürgen Schupp, 2010. "Late-Life Decline in Well-Being across Adulthood in Germany, the UK, and the US: Something Is Seriously Wrong at the End of Life," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 286, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
  22. Daniel H. Hill & Robert J. Willis, 2001. "Reducing Panel Attrition: A Search for Effective Policy Instruments," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 36(3), pages 416-438.
  23. Martin Kroh, 2009. "Documentation of Sample Sizes and Panel Attrition in the German Socio Economic Panel (SOEP) (1984 until 2008)," Data Documentation 47, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  24. Oliver Lipps, 2009. "Attrition of Households and Individuals in Panel Surveys," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 164, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
  25. Jonathan Burton & Heather Laurie & Peter Lynn, 2006. "The long-term effectiveness of refusal conversion procedures on longitudinal surveys," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 459-478.
  26. Bruce D. Meyer & James X. Sullivan, 2003. "Measuring the Well-Being of the Poor Using Income and Consumption," NBER Working Papers 9760, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  27. Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell & Paul Frijters, 2004. "How Important is Methodology for the estimates of the determinants of Happiness?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(497), pages 641-659, 07.
  28. Adrian Chadi, 2013. "The Role of Interviewer Encounters in Panel Responses on Life Satisfaction," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201311, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).
  29. Cheti Nicoletti & Franco Peracchi & Vincenzo Atella, 2005. "Survey Response and Survey Characteristics: Micro-level Evidence from the European Commission Household Panel," CEIS Research Paper 64, Tor Vergata University, CEIS.
  30. Gabriella Conti & Stephen Pudney, 2011. "Survey Design and the Analysis of Satisfaction," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(3), pages 1087-1093, August.
  31. Adrian Chadi, 2012. "I would really love to participate in your survey! Bias problems in the measurement of well-being," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(4), pages 3111-3119.
  32. Torbjørn Moum, 1994. "Is subjective well-being a predictor of nonresponse in broad population surveys?," Social Indicators Research, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 1-20, May.
  33. Martin Kroh, 2010. "Documentation of Sample Sizes and Panel Attrition in the German Socio Economic Panel (SOEP) (1984 until 2009)," Data Documentation 50, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

The CitEc project has not yet found citations to this item.

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

Access and download statistics

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwsop:diw_sp639. 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: (Bibliothek)

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.