IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp1049.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using Analysis of Gini (ANoGi) for Detecting Whether Two Sub-Samples Represent the Same Universe: The SOEP Experience

Author

Listed:
  • Frick, Joachim R.

    (DIW Berlin)

  • Goebel, Jan

    () (DIW Berlin)

  • Schechtman, Edna

    () (Ben Gurion University)

  • Wagner, Gert G.

    () (Max Planck Institute for Human Development)

  • Yitzhaki, Shlomo

    () (Hebrew University, Jerusalem)

Abstract

A particular shortcoming of panel surveys is potential bias arising from selective attrition. Based on data from the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) we analyze potential artifacts (level, structure, inequality of income) by comparing results from two independently drawn panel sub-samples, started in 1984 and 2000, respectively. Both sub-samples carried on using the same set of follow-up rules. We apply ANOGI (ANalysis Of GIni) techniques, the equivalent of ANOVA (ANalysis Of VAriance) performed on the basis of the Gini coefficient. The decomposition followed is presented in Yitzhaki (1994). We rearrange, reinterpret and use the decomposition in the comparison of sub-populations from which the different subsamples were drawn. Taking into account indicators for income, and for control purposes those for education and satisfaction as well, significant differences between these two subsamples with respect to (income) inequality are found in the first year, which start to fade away in wave 2 and disappear in wave 3. We find credible indication for these differences to be driven by changes in response behavior of short term panel members rather than by attrition among members of the longer running sub-sample.

Suggested Citation

  • Frick, Joachim R. & Goebel, Jan & Schechtman, Edna & Wagner, Gert G. & Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 2004. "Using Analysis of Gini (ANoGi) for Detecting Whether Two Sub-Samples Represent the Same Universe: The SOEP Experience," IZA Discussion Papers 1049, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp1049
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ftp.iza.org/dp1049.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dagum, Camilo, 1980. "Inequality Measures between Income Distributions with Applications," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(7), pages 1791-1803, November.
    2. Laurie, Heather, 2003. "From PAPI to CAPI: consequences for data quality on the British Household Panel Study," ISER Working Paper Series 2003-14, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    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. D'Ambrosio, Conchita & Frick, Joachim R., 2004. "Subjective Well-Being and Relative Deprivation: An Empirical Link," IZA Discussion Papers 1351, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    2. Paolo Liberati & Shlomo Yitzhaki, 2012. "GDP and beyond: an implementation of welfare considerations to the distribution of earnings in Italy," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0146, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    3. Andrew E. Clark & Sarah Flèche & Claudia Senik, 2016. "Economic Growth Evens Out Happiness: Evidence from Six Surveys," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 62(3), pages 405-419, September.
    4. Joachim Frick & Jan Goebel, 2008. "Regional Income Stratification in Unified Germany Using a Gini Decomposition Approach," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 555-577.
    5. Conchita D'Ambrosio & Joachim R. Frick, 2012. "Individual Wellbeing in a Dynamic Perspective," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 79(314), pages 284-302, April.
    6. Shlomo Yitzhaki & Edna Schechtman, 2009. "The “melting pot”: A success story?," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 7(2), pages 137-151, June.
    7. Susanne Elsas, 2013. "Pooling and Sharing Income within Households: A Satisfaction Approach," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 587, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    8. Jörg-Peter Schräpler & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2013. "Conversion of Non-Respondents in an Ongoing Panel Survey: The Case of the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP)," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 626, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    9. Jürgen Faik, 2013. "Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Equivalence Scales for West Germany Based on Subjective Data on Life Satisfaction," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 575, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    10. Paul Dolan & Richard Layard & Robert Metcalfe, 2011. "Measuring Subjective Wellbeing for Public Policy: Recommendations on Measures," CEP Special Papers 23, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    11. Shlomo Yitzhaki & Peter Lambert, 2013. "The relationship between the absolute deviation from a quantile and Gini’s mean difference," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 71(2), pages 97-104, September.
    12. Malinina, Tatiana (Малинина, Татьяна) & Gromov, Vladimir (Громов, Владимир), 2016. "Directions of Perfection of the Russian Tax Legislation on Topical Issues of Taxation of Income from Transactions with Financial Instruments
      [Направления Совершенствования Российского Налогового За
      ," Working Papers 544, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    13. Zacharias, Ajit & Vakulabharanam, Vamsi, 2011. "Caste Stratification and Wealth Inequality in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1820-1833.
    14. Conchita D’Ambrosio & Joachim Frick, 2007. "Income Satisfaction and Relative Deprivation: An Empirical Link," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 81(3), pages 497-519, May.
    15. Dolan, Paul & Layard, Richard & Metcalfe, Robert, 2011. "Measuring subjective well-being for public policy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 35420, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Joachim R. Frick & Kristina Krell, 2010. "Measuring Income in Household Panel Surveys for Germany: A Comparison of EU-SILC and SOEP," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 265, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    17. Knies, Gundi, 2012. "Life satisfaction and material well-being of children in the UK," ISER Working Paper Series 2012-15, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    18. Joachim Frick & Kristina Krell, 2011. "Einkommensmessungen in Haushaltspanelstudien für Deutschland: Ein Vergleich von EU-SILC und SOEP," AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, Springer;Deutsche Statistische Gesellschaft - German Statistical Society, vol. 5(3), pages 221-248, December.
    19. Edna Schechtman & Shlomo Yitzhaki & Taina Pudalov, 2011. "Gini’s multiple regressions: two approaches and their interaction," Metron - International Journal of Statistics, Dipartimento di Statistica, Probabilità e Statistiche Applicate - University of Rome, vol. 0(1), pages 67-99.
    20. Shlomo Yitzhaki & Edna Schechtman, 2005. "The properties of the extended Gini measures of variability and inequality," Metron - International Journal of Statistics, Dipartimento di Statistica, Probabilità e Statistiche Applicate - University of Rome, vol. 0(3), pages 401-433.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    panel studies; inequality decomposition; survey research; Gini; ANOGI;

    JEL classification:

    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:iza:izadps:dp1049. 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: (Mark Fallak). General contact details of provider: http://www.iza.org .

    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 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.

    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.