IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/randlp/99-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Anchoring and Acquiescence Bias in Measuring Assets in Households Surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Hurd, M.

Abstract

The Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and the Asset and Health Dynamics Study (AHEAD) are large nationally representative panel surveys of individuals aged 51-61 and 70 or over respectively at baseline and their spouses. The objective of this paper is to find evidence about anchoring and acquiescence bias in HRS asset data in a way that controls for selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Hurd, M., 1999. "Anchoring and Acquiescence Bias in Measuring Assets in Households Surveys," Papers 99-02, RAND - Labor and Population Program.
  • Handle: RePEc:fth:randlp:99-02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Currie, Janet & Thomas, Duncan, 1999. "Does Head Start help hispanic children?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 235-262.
    2. Currie, Janet & Thomas, Duncan, 1995. "Does Head Start Make a Difference?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 341-364.
    3. Janet Currie, 2001. "Early Childhood Education Programs," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 213-238, Spring.
    4. J. A. Temple & A. J. Reynolds & W. T. Miedel, "undated". "Can Early Intervention Prevent High School Dropout? Evidence from the Chicago Child-Parent Centers," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1180-98, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty.
    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. David Comerford & Liam Delaney & Colm Harmon, 2009. "Experimental Tests of Survey Responses to Expenditure Questions," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, pages 419-433.
    2. David Aadland & Arthur Caplan & Owen Phillips, 2007. "A Bayesian examination of information and uncertainty in contingent valuation," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 149-178, October.
    3. van Soest, Arthur & Hurd, Michael, 2008. "A Test for Anchoring and Yea-Saying in Experimental Consumption Data," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103, pages 126-136, March.
    4. Monika Bütler, 2002. "Flexibility and Redistribution in Old Age Insurance," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 138(IV), pages 427-437, December.
    5. Dolan, Paul & Metcalfe, Robert, 2012. "The relationship between innovation and subjective wellbeing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1489-1498.
    6. Arthur van Soest & Michael Hurd, 2004. "Models for Anchoring and Acquiescence Bias in Consumption Data," NBER Working Papers 10461, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Winter, Joachim, 0000. "Bracketing effects in categorized survey questions and the measurement of economic quantities," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 02-35, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    8. Fabian Gouret & Guillaume Hollard, 2011. "When Kahneman meets Manski: Using dual systems of reasoning to interpret subjective expectations of equity returns," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 371-392, April.
    9. Monika BÜTLER, 2003. "Mandated Annuities in Switzerland," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'Econométrie et d'Economie politique (DEEP) 03.08, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, DEEP.
    10. Monika Bütler & Federica Teppa, 2005. "Should You Take a Lump-Sum or Annuitize? Results from Swiss Pension Funds," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2005 2005-20, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    11. R Alessie & A Kapteyn, 2001. "New data for understanding saving," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 55-69, Spring.
    12. Alison J. Wellington & Justin B. Whitmire, 2007. "Kidney Transplants And The Shortage Of Donors: Is A Market The Answer?," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(2), pages 131-145, April.
    13. Jeffrey Grogger, 2009. "Welfare Reform, Returns to Experience, and Wages: Using Reservation Wages to Account for Sample Selection Bias," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(3), pages 490-502, August.
    14. Erin Ruel & Robert Hauser, 2013. "Explaining the Gender Wealth Gap," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 50(4), pages 1155-1176, August.
    15. Thomas Juster & Honggao Cao & Mick Couper & Daniel Hill & Michael Hurd & Joseph Lupton & Michael Perry & James Smith, 2007. "Enhancing the Quality of Data on the Measurement of Income and Wealth," Working Papers wp151, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    16. Kremslehner, Daniela & Muermann, Alexander, 2016. "Asymmetric information in automobile insurance: Evidence from driving behavior," CFS Working Paper Series 543, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    17. John L. Czajka & Gabrielle Denmead, "undated". "Income Data for Policy Analysis: A Comparative Assessment of Eight Surveys," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 19724257b78544bdbd55f15be, Mathematica Policy Research.
    18. F. Thomas Juster & Honggao Cao & Michael Perry & Mick Cooper, 2006. "The Effect of Unfolding Brackets on the Quality of Wealth Data in the HRS," Working Papers wp113, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    HOUSEHOLDS ; SURVEYS;

    JEL classification:

    • C80 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - General
    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation

    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:fth:randlp:99-02. 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: (Thomas Krichel). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/lpranus.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.