IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ese/iserwp/2003-08.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Respondent behaviour in panel studies: a case study for income-nonresponse by means of the British Household Panel Study (BHPS)

Author

Listed:
  • Schrapler, Jorg-Peter

Abstract

Many validation studies deal with item-nonresponse and measurement error in earning data. In this paper we explore motives of respondents for the failure to reveal earnings using the British Household Panel (BHPS). BHPS collects socio-economic information of private households in Great Britain. We explain the evolution of income-nonresponse in the BHPS and demonstrate the importance of a discrimination between refusing the income-statement or don't know.

Suggested Citation

  • Schrapler, Jorg-Peter, 2003. "Respondent behaviour in panel studies: a case study for income-nonresponse by means of the British Household Panel Study (BHPS)," ISER Working Paper Series 2003-08, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:ese:iserwp:2003-08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/files/working-papers/iser/2003-08.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pamela Campanelli & Colm O'Muircheartaigh, 1999. "Interviewers, Interviewer Continuity, and Panel Survey Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 59-76, February.
    2. Pamela Campanelli & Colm O'Muircheartaigh, 2002. "The Importance of Experimental Control in Testing the Impact of Interviewer Continuity on Panel Survey Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 129-144, May.
    3. Brownstone, David & Valletta, Robert G, 1996. "Modeling Earnings Measurement Error: A Multiple Imputation Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(4), pages 705-717, November.
    4. C. O'Muircheartaigh & P. Campanelli, 1999. "A multilevel exploration of the role of interviewers in survey non‐response," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 162(3), pages 437-446.
    5. Bollinger, Christopher R & David, Martin H, 2001. "Estimation with Response Error and Nonresponse: Food-Stamp Participation in the SIPP," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 19(2), pages 129-141, April.
    6. J. J. Hox, 1994. "Hierarchical Regression Models for Interviewer and Respondent Effects," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 22(3), pages 300-318, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephen P. Jenkins & Lorenzo Cappellari & Peter Lynn & Annette Jäckle & Emanuela Sala, 2006. "Patterns of consent: evidence from a general household survey," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(4), pages 701-722, October.
    2. Jörg-Peter Schräpler, 2004. "Respondent Behavior in Panel Studies," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 33(1), pages 118-156, August.
    3. Lorenzo Cappellari & Stephen P. Jenkins, 2004. "Modelling Low Pay Transition Probabilities, Accounting for Panel Attrition, Non-Response, and Initial Conditions," CESifo Working Paper Series 1232, CESifo.

    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. Jörg-Peter Schräpler, 2002. "Respondent Behavior in Panel Studies: A Case Study for Income-Nonresponse by Means of the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP)," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 299, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Adrian Chadi, 2019. "Dissatisfied with life or with being interviewed? Happiness and the motivation to participate in a survey," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 519-553, October.
    3. Jan Pickery & Geert Loosveldt, 2002. "A Multilevel Multinomial Analysis of Interviewer Effects on Various Components of Unit Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 427-437, November.
    4. Jörg-Peter Schräpler, 2004. "Respondent Behavior in Panel Studies," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 33(1), pages 118-156, August.
    5. Geert Loosveldt & Koen Beullens, 2014. "A Procedure to Assess Interviewer Effects on Nonresponse Bias," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440145, February.
    6. Kerstin Bruckmeier & Katrin Hohmeyer & Stefan Schwarz, 2018. "Welfare receipt misreporting in survey data and its consequences for state dependence estimates: new insights from linked administrative and survey data," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 52(1), pages 1-21, December.
    7. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4924 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Mittag, Nikolas, 2016. "Correcting for Misreporting of Government Benefits," IZA Discussion Papers 10266, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Matthew Blackwell & James Honaker & Gary King, 2017. "A Unified Approach to Measurement Error and Missing Data: Overview and Applications," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(3), pages 303-341, August.
    10. 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.
    11. Craig Gundersen & Brent Kreider, 2008. "Food Stamps and Food Insecurity: What Can Be Learned in the Presence of Nonclassical Measurement Error?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(2), pages 352-382.
    12. Meyer, Bruce D. & Mittag, Nikolas, 2019. "Combining Administrative and Survey Data to Improve Income Measurement," IZA Discussion Papers 12266, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Bruckmeier, Kerstin & Riphahn, Regina T. & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2019. "Benefit underreporting in survey data and its consequences for measuring non-take-up: new evidence from linked administrative and survey data," IAB-Discussion Paper 201906, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    14. Ian Brunton-Smith & Patrick Sturgis & George Leckie, 2017. "Detecting and understanding interviewer effects on survey data by using a cross-classified mixed effects location–scale model," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 551-568, February.
    15. Rebecca Vassallo & Gabriele Durrant & Peter Smith, 2017. "Separating interviewer and area effects by using a cross-classified multilevel logistic model: simulation findings and implications for survey designs," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 531-550, February.
    16. Karen S Hamrick & Margaret Andrews, 2016. "SNAP Participants’ Eating Patterns over the Benefit Month: A Time Use Perspective," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-18, July.
    17. Brownstone, David, 1997. "Multiple Imputation Methodology for Missing Data, Non-Random Response, and Panel Attrition," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2zd6w6hh, University of California Transportation Center.
    18. Markus Frölich & Martin Huber, 2014. "Treatment Evaluation With Multiple Outcome Periods Under Endogeneity and Attrition," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 109(508), pages 1697-1711, December.
    19. Lynn Peter & Kaminska Olena & Goldstein Harvey, 2014. "Panel Attrition: How Important is Interviewer Continuity?," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 30(3), pages 1-15, September.
    20. Bruckmeier, Kerstin & Müller, Gerrit & Riphahn, Regina T., 2015. "Survey misreporting of welfare receipt—Respondent, interviewer, and interview characteristics," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 103-107.
    21. Martin H. David & Christopher R. Bollinger, 2005. "I didn't tell, and I won't tell: dynamic response error in the SIPP," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(4), pages 563-569.

    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:ese:iserwp:2003-08. 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: Jonathan Nears (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rcessuk.html .

    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.