IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/2055.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can survey design reduce anchoring bias in recall data? Evidence from Malawi

Author

Listed:
  • Godlonton, Susan
  • Hernandez, Manuel A.
  • Paz, Cynthia

Abstract

Recall biases in retrospective survey data are widely considered to be pervasive and have important implications for effective agricultural research. In this paper, we leverage the survey design literature and test three strategies to attenuate mental anchoring in retrospective data collection: question order effects, retrieval cues, and aggregate (community) anchoring. We embed a survey design experiment in a longitudinal survey of smallholder farmers in Malawi and focus on anchoring bias in maize production and happiness exploiting differences between recalled and concurrent responses. We find that asking for retrospective data before concurrent data reduces recall bias by approximately 34% for maize production, a meaningful improvement with no increase in survey data collection costs. Retrieval cues are less successful in reducing the bias for maize reports and involve more data collection time, while community anchors can exacerbate the bias. Reversing the order of questions and retrieval cues do not help to ease the bias for happiness reports.

Suggested Citation

  • Godlonton, Susan & Hernandez, Manuel A. & Paz, Cynthia, 2021. "Can survey design reduce anchoring bias in recall data? Evidence from Malawi," IFPRI discussion papers 2055, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:2055
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/10568/143409
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan Beggs & Kathryn Graddy, 2009. "Anchoring Effects: Evidence from Art Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 1027-1039, June.
    2. repec:lic:licosd:41819 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Beegle, Kathleen & Carletto, Calogero & Himelein, Kristen, 2012. "Reliability of recall in agricultural data," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 34-41.
    4. Abay, Kibrom A. & Abate, Gashaw T. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Bernard, Tanguy, 2019. "Correlated non-classical measurement errors, ‘Second best’ policy inference, and the inverse size-productivity relationship in agriculture," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 171-184.
    5. de Nicola, Francesca & Giné, Xavier, 2014. "How accurate are recall data? Evidence from coastal India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 52-65.
    6. repec:oup:qjecon:v:129:y:2014:i:2:p:939-993. is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Joachim De Weerdt & Kathleen Beegle & Jed Friedman & John Gibson, 2016. "The Challenge of Measuring Hunger through Survey," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(4), pages 727-758.
    8. Krueger, Alan B. & Schkade, David A., 2008. "The reliability of subjective well-being measures," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1833-1845, August.
    9. Furnham, Adrian & Boo, Hua Chu, 2011. "A literature review of the anchoring effect," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 35-42, February.
    10. Karlan, Dean S. & Zinman, Jonathan, 2012. "List randomization for sensitive behavior: An application for measuring use of loan proceeds," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 71-75.
    11. Joachim De Weerdt & John Gibson & Kathleen Beegle, 2020. "What Can We Learn from Experimenting with Survey Methods?," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 431-447, October.
    12. Deininger, Klaus & Carletto, Calogero & Savastano, Sara & Muwonge, James, 2012. "Can diaries help in improving agricultural production statistics? Evidence from Uganda," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 42-50.
    13. Susan Godlonton & Manuel A Hernandez & Mike Murphy, 2018. "Anchoring Bias in Recall Data: Evidence from Central America," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(2), pages 479-501.
    14. Beegle, Kathleen & De Weerdt, Joachim & Friedman, Jed & Gibson, John, 2012. "Methods of household consumption measurement through surveys: Experimental results from Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 3-18.
    15. Campbell, Sean D. & Sharpe, Steven A., 2009. "Anchoring Bias in Consensus Forecasts and Its Effect on Market Prices," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(2), pages 369-390, April.
    16. P. Frykblom & Jason Shogren, 2000. "An Experimental Testing of Anchoring Effects in Discrete Choice Questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(3), pages 329-341, July.
    17. Kate Ambler & Alan de Brauw & Susan Godlonton, 2018. "Measuring postharvest losses at the farm level in Malawi," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 62(1), pages 139-160, January.
    18. George Judge & Laura Schechter, 2009. "Detecting Problems in Survey Data Using Benford’s Law," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 44(1).
    19. Douglas Gollin & David Lagakos & Michael E. Waugh, 2014. "The Agricultural Productivity Gap," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(2), pages 939-993.
    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. Umer, Hamza & Kurosaki, Takashi, 2024. "‘Update Bias’: Manipulating past information based on the existing circumstances," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 113(C).

    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. Arthi, Vellore & Beegle, Kathleen & De Weerdt, Joachim & Palacios-López, Amparo, 2018. "Not your average job: Measuring farm labor in Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 160-172.
    2. Dang, Hai-Anh H & Carletto, Calogero, 2022. "Recall Bias Revisited: Measure Farm Labor Using Mixed-Mode Surveys and Multiple Imputation," IZA Discussion Papers 14997, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Douglas Gollin & Christopher Udry, 2021. "Heterogeneity, Measurement Error, and Misallocation: Evidence from African Agriculture," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(1), pages 1-80.
    4. Susan Godlonton & Manuel A Hernandez & Mike Murphy, 2018. "Anchoring Bias in Recall Data: Evidence from Central America," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(2), pages 479-501.
    5. Joachim De Weerdt & John Gibson & Kathleen Beegle, 2020. "What Can We Learn from Experimenting with Survey Methods?," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 431-447, October.
    6. Chaoran Chen & Diego Restuccia & Raül Santaeulàlia-Llopis, 2023. "Land Misallocation and Productivity," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 441-465, April.
    7. Kilic, Talip & Moylan, Heather & Ilukor, John & Mtengula, Clement & Pangapanga-Phiri, Innocent, 2021. "Root for the tubers: Extended-harvest crop production and productivity measurement in surveys," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    8. Wollburg, Philip & Tiberti, Marco & Zezza, Alberto, 2021. "Recall length and measurement error in agricultural surveys," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    9. Ragui Assaad & Caroline Krafft & Shaimaa Yassin, 2018. "Comparing retrospective and panel data collection methods to assess labor market dynamics," IZA Journal of Migration and Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-34, December.
    10. Abate, Gashaw T. & Abay, Kibrom A. & Chamberlin, Jordan & Sebsibie, Samuel, 2024. "Measuring land rental market participation in smallholder agriculture can survey design innovations improve land market participation statistics?," IFPRI discussion papers 2255, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. Fiala, Nathan & Masselus, Lise, 2022. "Whom to ask? Testing respondent effects in household surveys," Ruhr Economic Papers 935, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    12. Masselus, Lise & Fiala, Nathan, 2024. "Whom to ask? Testing respondent effects in household surveys," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    13. Peterson-Wilhelm, Bailey & Schwab, Benjamin, 2024. "How does recall bias in farm labor impact separability tests?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    14. Florence Kondylis & Valerie Mueller & S. Zhu, 2015. "Measuring agricultural knowledge and adoption," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 449-462, May.
    15. Abate, Gashaw T. & de Brauw, Alan & Hirvonen, Kalle & Wolle, Abdulazize, 2023. "Measuring consumption over the phone: Evidence from a survey experiment in urban Ethiopia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    16. De Magalhães, Leandro & Santaeulàlia-Llopis, Raül, 2018. "The consumption, income, and wealth of the poorest: An empirical analysis of economic inequality in rural and urban Sub-Saharan Africa for macroeconomists," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 350-371.
    17. Sam Desiere & Lotte Staelens & Marijke D’Haese, 2016. "When the Data Source Writes the Conclusion: Evaluating Agricultural Policies," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(9), pages 1372-1387, September.
    18. Ugo Pica-Ciamarra & Derek Baker & Nancy Morgan & Alberto Zezza & Carlo Azzarri & Cheikh Ly & Longin Nsiima & Simplice Nouala & Patrick Okello & Joseph Sserugga, 2014. "Investing in the Livestock Sector : Why Good Numbers Matter, A Sourcebook for Decision Makers on How to Improve Livestock Data," World Bank Publications - Reports 17830, The World Bank Group.
    19. Calogero Carletto & Dean Jolliffe & Raka Banerjee, 2015. "From Tragedy to Renaissance: Improving Agricultural Data for Better Policies," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(2), pages 133-148, February.
    20. Sofia Amaral & Lelys Dinarte-Diaz & Patricio Dominguez & Steffanny Romero & Santiago M. Perez-Vincent, 2022. "Talk or Text? Evaluating Response Rates by Remote Survey Method during Covid-19," CESifo Working Paper Series 9517, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:fpr:ifprid:2055. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.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.