Validation of Survey Data on Income and Employment: The ISMIE Experience
This report derives from the project "Improving survey measurement of income and employment (ISMIE)" which investigates measurement error in survey data on income and employment, using a UK sub-sample of the European Household Community Panel (ECHP). In this paper we describe the process of collecting validation data and the outcomes of the process. Validation data were obtained from two sources: employers' records and government benefit data from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). The former provided information on occupation and employment status, gross and net pay, membership of company pension schemes and industry sector. The latter provided histories of benefit receipt and tax credits, for example, child, disability, housing and unemployment benefits, pensions and income support. In the survey interview, respondents were asked for written permission both to obtain their DWP records and to contact their employer. They were also asked to provide information that would facilitate the process of obtaining the validation data: National Insurance number (NINO) and employer contact details. Subsequently, DWP records were extracted using a non-hierarchical matching strategy, based on different combinations of identifying variables obtained in the survey (NINO, sex, date of birth, name and postcode), and a survey of employers was carried out (mail, with telephone follow-up). The representativeness of the validation samples obtained depends on the co-operation of both survey respondents and providers of validation data, as well as errors in the matching process. We report permission rates, proportions providing matching items, match rates for the DWP data and response rates to the employer survey. We identify correlates of these measures of success at each stage of the validation process in terms of substantive characteristics of the survey respondents. Variation by subgroups is identified and implications for the representativeness of the validation sample are discussed.
|Length:||III, 55 p.|
|Date of creation:||2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Mohrenstraße 58, D-10117 Berlin|
Web page: http://www.diw.de/en
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Stephen P. Jenkins, 2000. "Modelling household income dynamics," Journal of Population Economics, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 529-567.
- repec:ese:iserwp:2004-23 is not listed on IDEAS
- Duncan, Greg J & Hill, Daniel H, 1985. "An Investigation of the Extent and Consequences of Measurement Error in Labor-Economic Survey Data," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(4), pages 508-32, October.
- Bollinger, Christopher R, 1998. "Measurement Error in the Current Population Survey: A Nonparametric Look," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(3), pages 576-94, July.
- repec:ese:iserwp:2004-12 is not listed on IDEAS
- repec:ese:iserwp:2004-16 is not listed on IDEAS
- Greenberg, David & Halsey, Harlan, 1983. "Systematic Misreporting and Effects of Income Maintenance Experiments on Work Effort: Evidence from the Seattle-Denver Experiment," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(4), pages 380-407, October.
- Bound, John, et al, 1994. "Evidence on the Validity of Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Labor Market Data," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 12(3), pages 345-68, July.
- John Bound & Alan B. Krueger, 1989.
"The Extent of Measurement Error In Longitudinal Earnings Data: Do Two Wrongs Make A Right?,"
NBER Working Papers
2885, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bound, John & Krueger, Alan B, 1991. "The Extent of Measurement Error in Longitudinal Earnings Data: Do Two Wrongs Make a Right?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, January.
- Bound, John & Brown, Charles & Mathiowetz, Nancy, 2001. "Measurement error in survey data," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 59, pages 3705-3843 Elsevier.
- Stephen P. Jenkins & Peter Lynn & Annette Jäckle & Emanuela Sala, 2005.
"Linking Household Survey and Administrative Record Data: What Should the Matching Variables Be?,"
Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin
489, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
- Mellow, Wesley & Sider, Hal, 1983. "Accuracy of Response in Labor Market Surveys: Evidence and Implications," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(4), pages 331-44, October.
- Peter Lynn & Annette Jäckle & Stephen P. Jenkins & Emanuela Sala, 2005.
"The Effects of Dependent Interviewing on Responses to Questions on Income Sources,"
Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin
487, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp488. 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.